Eleven States Join California at the Supreme Court

[Siberian Relic]

Are we all in agreement over the principle of this law? I, for one, don't want Mature-rated games in the hands of minors; it's something that happens far too often, and I'm pleased that particular issue has seen the amount of light it has.

HOWEVER, this mandate of control is far too much. Rather than wasting time and money on this fracas, those resources should be put toward a campaign to get the kids' absent-minded parents to pay attention and act like adults.

 

[Jabberwock xeno]

Damn it, no! We will not be a new Australia!
Bad government! Bad!

This.

I was under the impression that 13 states joined our side, but I ust have misread it

****!

 

[scotth266]

I'm not saying M rated games are the same as pornography, I'm saying the government limiting what media minors can have access to is hardly a new concept. What about FCC regulations that limit what words are used on TV? Or what words can be said on the radio? This has been going on for decades.

Here's the thing though: the stores, by and large, already DON'T sell M-rated games to minors. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/103555-Retailers-Turn-Away-80-of-Kids-Trying-to-Buy-M-Rated-Games] You can get carded at Walmart if you look too young for the store's 18-and-up policy, for instance. Carded for buying a GAME. It's ridiculous, but I suppose it's preferential to what may happen if this law passes.

I highly suggest that you watch the Extra Credits video on why this case is so dangerous. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/1961-Free-Speech]

 

[KezzieZ]

Wait a second. I thought that you had to be carded to buy an M-rated game in the U.S.
Am I wrong in that assumption? At the very least, I get carded because I look fairly young.

Why are video games always the scapegoats, though? Don't these guys have any better to do than fear-mongering? Like, say, actual politics?

I'm really worried that if this goes through, we'll be a step closer to having the same issues that Australians have with banned games.

 

[Verlander]

I'm sorry, but I honestly can't get my head around how this is as bad as everyone is saying. I live in the UK and there are legal age restrictions on buying games, like there are on buying films/alcohol/gambling/cigarettes/pornography and even going to the cinema. It doesn't stop us getting any of the gory titles (I don't think), all it means is that you have to be 18 to buy some of them (not that it stops kids getting them).

Reading through Alexander Macris article, a lot of it seems based on assumption. Why would distributers not sell in California? It's still money they'd be making. Why would Wal Mart etc need to spend loads of money on training? What training do you need to ID someone? I was a barman for 5 years, I never had any special training in order to ask someone for ID. I disagree with censoring games, but do we even know that's what they are going to do? Again, if it's a "possible", then I'd say it's pretty unlikely, as it's the only part of this which is unconstitutional (from what I beleieve)

I don't agree that this state law is necessary, but it primarily seems to be a problem with you guys because of your constitution, which makes it seem like you are crying over spilt milk (from over here). Or have I missed a major point?

At the end of the day, you don't want games to be treated differently to books or films, but they ARE different. They are interactive media, and as Macris pointed out, everything is becoming more and more interactive. These things need to be legislated, otherwise it is a judicial nightmare, like the internet can be. Sometimes you need to take a step back before you can make a leap forward, and I'm not yet convinced this is even a step back.

(Edited)

Again, if I've missed a major point, please let me know

 

[lSHaDoW-FoXl]

I've been shooting men in the nuts since golden eye came out and really, I don't have anything wrong with me. I've always been aware that shooting people is wrong and I'm even more aware that in the nuts is the worse place imaginable. These politicians clearly need to shut the fuck up, pick up a controller, and actually play a game.

 

[4484448444844484]

Being from Connecticut, in Blumenthal I am dissapoint.

 

[Arawn.Chernobog]

Land of the free, hey?

Freedom of expression, hey?

Zeig heil, Zuprreme Kourt!

 

[Kije]

Seriously, If this garbage passes, I'm so moving to Europe...

 

[SelectivelyEvil13]

Oh joy! Good ol' Michigan joins the raping of the first amendment. Go figure, this state is a pathetic joke that barely qualifies as the submissive-bondage territory of Narnia. The economy here is practically nonexistent after the auto industry foundering, but let's worry about a harmless, interactive entertainment medium that doesn't deserve the same rights of access as Saw 4. While we're at it, let's just drive a knife through another industry that was garnering sales tax for our broke economy. Yay prioritization!

It would be ideal to somehow restrict minors from accessing mature games and polluting the online communities with arrant delinquents. However, this law clearly oversteps its intended purpose by facilitating the systematic disintegration of the video game industry. Now is as good a time as any for industry lobbyists to mount their soap boxes and threaten the money train. What if this translates into the film and book industries as well? Michigan for instance is courting the film industry in an attempt to bring jobs, but wouldn't restriction of the first amendment potentially block this objective? Taking the rights away from one medium is only a skip and hop away from another, especially when one considers the graphic content in film and television that grossly overshadows anything in 99% of video games.

 

[Radelaide]

So, they'll restrict sales of 'm' rated games to minors?
Something like already exists for, say, pornography?

Could someone tell me why this is bad?
I'm genuinely curious.

Are u american? if not its irrelevant to you.

If you are and would like to see your government follow the laws(amendments) it set for itself WITHOUT EXCEPTIONS, then this is very important ^-^

Youre giving the government an excuse to enact other amendment breaking laws if you let this slip. I just dont want there to be an exception if its based on an issue as frivolous as this one.

As Andy points out, the videogames industry ALREADY restrict sales of M-Rated games to minors. So y is there a need to make a LAW out of it all of a sudden? and at the same time make interactive media unprotected under the first amendment in the process?

I'm with you, BT. I'm not sure why this is causing so much controversy when it's just common sense.

@DTWolfwood: Just because he's a Canadian and I'm Australian doesn't mean we can't have a vested interest in this. Ratings can only do so much. The Video games industry have a rating system which, if used properly, would restrict the sale of M rated and above content to minors, but since retailers don't ask for ID when selling a game, I don't see how it's working.

Anything that stops inappropriate material getting into the wrong hands is a good idea.

Also, stop clinging to the Bill of Rights like it's a safety blanket. This law isn't breaking freedom of speech, or privacy or whatever bullshit reason people are getting their lacy panties in a twist. It's just annoying. I don't see how making sure that minors don't have access to content that isn't appropriate for their age is a bad thing. Especially when it comes to under 15 year olds. Just because you're self-aware and think you know everything, doesn't mean you do and doesn't mean you can handle some of the content in these games.

 

[GothmogII]

To anyone who doesn't think this is a big deal consider the following. I'm 20, born and raised in Ireland. During my lifetime the movie the Exorcist was outright banned here. You know why because unlike America we don't have anything as incredible as the first amendment. Without the protection of that these busy bodies who think they know how you should live better than you do have nothing stopping them from controlling the media the same way they do here or Australia. The first amendment is amazing and you shouldn't take it for granted. It offers you protection in ways you probably never considered. Even with all my gripes with America I'd rather be there with it's constitution. If video games lose this they're not protected by freedom of expression and that makes it easier for the Jack Thompson's of the world to get their way.

Huh...*stares at my copy of The Exorcist* How long did that last for?

Secondly, overall, while true the US as a whole hasn't banned a movie, that doesn't mean several movies, books and such haven't been banned at one point or another by various states. And while I don't disagree with the US Constitution, and indeed agree with many of it's tenants, this does not make it an infallible document, nor has it not been subject to changes since it's creation.

Odd thing though, were those rights inalienable before or after they were set to parchment? The way I keeping hearing, makes it sound that it's the document itself that creates the rights, rather than the people who support it. If no-one believes in the spirit of the document, then it is worthless imo. Sadly, that seems to be happening in this case.

 

[subject_87]

I have to say, Arnold 'Star of Predator and Terminator' Schwarzenegger: are you for or against excessive violence?

 

[NewClassic_v1legacy]

This law isn't breaking freedom of speech, or privacy or whatever bullshit reason people are getting their lacy panties in a twist. It's just annoying. I don't see how making sure that minors don't have access to content that isn't appropriate for their age is a bad thing. Especially when it comes to under 15 year olds.

My biggest issue with it is the precedent involved. It's not that the ban of sale is the problem. Just about every game vender, from GameStop to Wal-Mart follows the ESRB's recommendation in the company policy. The only difference would be the law itself. The precedent enables attorneys like Jack Thompson the legal precedent to challenge not just the sale of games, but also the rating, whether or not a game is above-board, and if it's not too violent for its particular rating.

Then you have to consider the expense for venders. From the link in the opening post, from the Publisher's Note [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/publishers-note/7840-Publishers-Note-Schwarzenegger-vs-Interactivity],

The California law could be found unconstitutional simply because it could lead to "chilling effects" on free speech. In legal terms, a "chilling effect" occurs when speech or conduct is suppressed by fear of penalization. For instance, traditional "brick and mortar" businesses, such as GameStop and Wal-mart will have to restructure their entire business model to ensure minors are not sold games to avoid liability of $1,000 per sale. Additionally, those in best control of the point-of-sale (sales clerks) are specifically exempt from liability, shifting a burden of increased training, supervision, and thus higher costs. These businesses may decide that it is more cost effective to not stock and sell these games all together, effectively chilling speech to all members of the community.

In addition, businesses with an online distribution model are even less able to ensure the purchaser of the game is not a minor. Since online digital distribution retailers are national entities, they might be required to geo-target California as a state where no mature games will be sold at all as the only way to avoid liability under this bill. Again, this would be a chilling effect, because it will impose penalties which would reduce the likelihood of such speech being made at all.

Things like this are the major problem with this law. However, for things like selling tobacco and alcohol to minors, the law is for the misdemeanor possession on the purchaser. In the case of games, the law is going to come down on the business. If that happens too many times, will any business be able to stop games over the ESRB rating Teen? How long until we the "Australian" version of violent games become the "American" versions as well?

And by extension, since we have a lot of developers here, how long until there's nothing but those?

 

[DTWolfwood]

Spoiler: snip

So, they'll restrict sales of 'm' rated games to minors?
Something like already exists for, say, pornography?

Could someone tell me why this is bad?
I'm genuinely curious.

Are u american? if not its irrelevant to you.

If you are and would like to see your government follow the laws(amendments) it set for itself WITHOUT EXCEPTIONS, then this is very important ^-^

Youre giving the government an excuse to enact other amendment breaking laws if you let this slip. I just dont want there to be an exception if its based on an issue as frivolous as this one.

As Andy points out, the videogames industry ALREADY restrict sales of M-Rated games to minors. So y is there a need to make a LAW out of it all of a sudden? and at the same time make interactive media unprotected under the first amendment in the process?

I'm with you, BT. I'm not sure why this is causing so much controversy when it's just common sense.

@DTWolfwood: Just because he's a Canadian and I'm Australian doesn't mean we can't have a vested interest in this. Ratings can only do so much. The Video games industry have a rating system which, if used properly, would restrict the sale of M rated and above content to minors, but since retailers don't ask for ID when selling a game, I don't see how it's working.

Anything that stops inappropriate material getting into the wrong hands is a good idea.

Also, stop clinging to the Bill of Rights like it's a safety blanket. This law isn't breaking freedom of speech, or privacy or whatever bullshit reason people are getting their lacy panties in a twist. It's just annoying. I don't see how making sure that minors don't have access to content that isn't appropriate for their age is a bad thing. Especially when it comes to under 15 year olds. Just because you're self-aware and think you know everything, doesn't mean you do and doesn't mean you can handle some of the content in these games.

Sorry to hear that you are just willing to let your government bend you over. I love gaming and i believe in personal responsibility. If you are a parent and you let your kids get their hands on M rated games, you are already unfit to be a parent. No amount of laws will stop that. Sorry. I guess to you its ok to just let everyone else raise your kids.

To fight this is the most American thing one can do. The country was found on the principal of limited government. Our checks and balances are in place to keep them honest. Its the republic i love and support.

Its sad when ppl become so passive that they don't question the legality of a governments actions.

 

[Ekonk]

Not a big fan of the USA in general, but it would seem that California really takes the cake. Here's hoping they lose the case.