ESA Wins Injunction Against Chicago Transit Authority

[Icecoldcynic]

I can't believe they finally accepted this:

"The CTA appears unwilling to recognize this established fact, and has shown a remarkable ignorance of the dynamism, creativity and expressive nature of computer and video games."

 

[Dogstile]

Surely if CTA owns the space they can choose what goes on it. I mean, its not like they /have/ to put up an advert for games. That's like me giving you £10 and insisting that you kick a kitten in the face, and saying that you have to do it because i can give you money to do it.

Stupid thing to compare it to, but i couldn't think of anything that would get my point across better than kittens.

 

[Eri]

This bothers me. The Chicago Transit Authority owns the ad space and can contract it out to anyone they damn well please, and (assuming they obey the contract/buyout/refund terms) terminate said contract at will.

This is not a free speech issue. If it were, then in theory, consider the following scenario:

US Department of Agriculture and National Dairymen's Association decide that they want to address the issue of widespread vitamin D deficiency (look it up) by promoting the consumption of more milk by schoolchildren.

PeTA gets wind of this, buys ad space on billboards along school bus routes and near schools with their latest anti-milk propaganda bullshit.

Whoever owns the billboards (Viacom/Clear Channel/whoever), realizing they've got a public-relations nightmare on their hands, sets internal policy barring the use of their billboards for advertising by "extremist groups" or whatever term they care to use to make PeTA persona non grata.

PeTA sues, gets injunction forcing anti-milk ads to stay up.

Quoth Jon Stewart: "Oh, it's not funny when it's YOUR guy!"

You seem to be missing the point. The whole reason for this is that they are not treating games as they would other media. You can't just pick and choose, they all should get the same treatment.

 

[Lexodus]

Love it how they have Grand Theft Auto being advertised on a mode of transport. Anyone else smell the irony?

 

[SimuLord]

This bothers me. The Chicago Transit Authority owns the ad space and can contract it out to anyone they damn well please, and (assuming they obey the contract/buyout/refund terms) terminate said contract at will.

This is not a free speech issue. If it were, then in theory, consider the following scenario:

US Department of Agriculture and National Dairymen's Association decide that they want to address the issue of widespread vitamin D deficiency (look it up) by promoting the consumption of more milk by schoolchildren.

PeTA gets wind of this, buys ad space on billboards along school bus routes and near schools with their latest anti-milk propaganda bullshit.

Whoever owns the billboards (Viacom/Clear Channel/whoever), realizing they've got a public-relations nightmare on their hands, sets internal policy barring the use of their billboards for advertising by "extremist groups" or whatever term they care to use to make PeTA persona non grata.

PeTA sues, gets injunction forcing anti-milk ads to stay up.

Quoth Jon Stewart: "Oh, it's not funny when it's YOUR guy!"

You seem to be missing the point. The whole reason for this is that they are not treating games as they would other media. You can't just pick and choose, they all should get the same treatment.

And I say the CTA can do whatever it damn well pleases, no matter how asinine.