Groups sue over Video Game Law

[bapenguin]

Yahoo (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051018/tc_nm/media_videogames_dc) is reporting that certain groups, including the Entertainment Software Association, are filing a lawsuit in the state of California in regards to the recent law banning the sale of certain games to minors.

"It is not up to any industry or the government to set standards for what kids can see or do; that is the role of parents," Douglas Lowenstein, the group's president said.

"Everyone involved with this misguided law has known from the start that it is an unconstitutional infringement on the First Amendment freedoms of those who create and sell video games."

Federal courts have ruled against violent video game legislation in Washington state, the city of Indianapolis and St. Louis County in Missouri, saying the moves violated constitutional free speech guarantees.
Is there a law making it illegal for a minor to buy an R rated movie on DVD? No? Oh ok.

[Abednigo]

This kind of crap is really hypocritical. If they want to make laws making it illegal for minors to buy M rated games, they should do the same for every other form of entertainment. Movies, music, etc. But they don't. Some people are just so narrow minded.

Plus what about the parents? Stop trying to raise everyone elses children!!! Parents need to step up and do their job and not let local and federal governments try and make these kinds of decisions for them.

[Karmakin]

Which is the reason that the courts are going to strike the law down. The courts have found that you're able to ban things for minors, and that's constitutional, (BOO on that IMO. It's offensive and it creates more problems than it fixes), but that video games were singled out is a violation of equal protection.

[LilEvilFish]

"Happy birthday son, Debbie Does Dallas, classic movie! Great extras on the DVD"
"But dad I wanted Pokemon!"

I'm not sure on the whole legal precedence in this country when it comes to movies and such. I know with games if a shop is caught selling games to underage kids, they're fined quite a considerable amount. Any kid worth their stuff will get their mom/dad to buy it for them anyway (I always did), exploitation of parents is where it's at!

[Taco]

If I remember correctly, the case with this law is it doesn't go by the ratings system. It's pretty much a judgement call for what violent and inappropriate means. So it's even worse if they were just saying any M or AO games. Theoretically they could punish stores for selling lower rated games, there is no clear cut line for what is ok and what is not.

I remember reading that when the bill was initially passed and didn't see anything in that article to refute it. It seem's nearly implausible to me, so correct me if I'm wrong ;).

[Cupelix]

"It is not up to any industry or the government to set standards for what kids can see or do; that is the role of parents," Douglas Lowenstein, the group's president said. That's why its illegal to sell pornography to a minor, right? I'm always a little confused by people when they argue about this. They're fine having it be illegal to sell porn to children, but not anything (be it video game or movie) that contains depictions of exceptional violence? Its strange to me that people separate sex and violence in this way - its probably agreed that its bad for children to see either - so why is one illegal and the other isn't?

[Taco]

Personally, I don't have a problem with a law against selling an M or AO rated game without a parent present, never have. I don't think that's what this law is though.

[NoName]

This seems like a good use for the 10 grand ESA was recently donated in Jack Thompson's name...

[Cupelix]

That may be true in this case - I don't live in CA, so I can say that I honestly haven't read too deeply into what the law actually states. I was talking in a more general sense anyway, based on what this Mr. Lowenstein's quote read. I just find it odd that sometimes we do things "half way" here - legislate this, but don't touch that, even if the concepts are extremely similar.

[Taco]

Oh yeah, wasn't arguing with you, either way Lowenstein's point remains the same.

[Crispy951]

I remember once being in a Gamespot with my friend and my mom and we were trying to convince her to let me buy Diablo 2 (I think I was 15-16 around the time) and she said she would let me get it if I went up to the counter and the employee sold it to me. I walked right up and had no problem buying it. Smug satisfaction folks, smug satisfaction.

[Abednigo]

It seems to me that we are in a period of time where most parents are clueless about videogames. Most people my age (30) who have kids that are too young to really know what games they want. If you have kids that are in the age range of wanting specific games, you're probably too old to really be an avid gamer yourself. I think when I'm in my 40s and I have kids that are that age, having been a gamer for, at that point, over 25 years, I will know what games to look out for to keep my kids from playing (and I will know where to get the info on them). Most parents these days are just ignorant. I have parents asking me for info on games for their kids all the time. They just have no idea where to look. When I'm there age, since I've been informed most of my life, it won't be an issue. And I suspect that this issue will fade away as more lifelong gamers have older kids.

[JazGalaxy]

What people don't seem to realize is that capitalistic big wigs don't care one iota about anyone other than themselves and their money. They will give a free hit of cocaine to a two year old if it meant they had an addict for life. They don't care. All they want is the money. That's all it's about. They will make smutty games and sell them to 10 year olds without batting an eye. It's not just legal, but necessary to keep irresponsible people from escaping all responsibillity. The fact that an adult could put on a suit, look himself in the mirror, and then proceed to go to court to argue how it's his constitutional right to sell smut to children baffles me.

[Nesta]

It seems to me that we are in a period of time where most parents are clueless about videogames. Most people my age (30) who have kids that are too young to really know what games they want. If you have kids that are in the age range of wanting specific games, you're probably too old to really be an avid gamer yourself. I think when I'm in my 40s and I have kids that are that age, having been a gamer for, at that point, over 25 years, I will know what games to look out for to keep my kids from playing (and I will know where to get the info on them). Most parents these days are just ignorant. I have parents asking me for info on games for their kids all the time. They just have no idea where to look. When I'm there age, since I've been informed most of my life, it won't be an issue. And I suspect that this issue will fade away as more lifelong gamers have older kids.

It's in this vein that I wonder what will happen with all this legislation when this generation's parents get kids growing into their teens. My daughter is only two, but in another 8-10 years I wonder how much of this stuff is really going to applicable. I am probably going to be playing the same games she would want to buy, anyways, so I would be a pretty good judge if it's appropriate to her or not. Then again, never underestimate the stupidity of the human race. Even these days, it only takes a little bit of effort on the parent's part to investigate a game their child wants to buy. This crazy thing called "teh internets" has made that sort of research quite easy and thoroughly complete.

[Taco]

I'm not sure I get the points you bring up Nesta and Abednigo. They are not making it illegal for minors to play games, just to buy them. So if anything the law will strengthen as your generation gets older and parents can make better informed decisions on games.

I still think it's stupid to turn it into a judgement call that a game store can be punished for.

[Sion]

christians love doing this sort of stuff.

[Deadend]

So... why is everyone cool with games being singled out from all the other media?

This is BAD. It's saying games are diffrent than other forms of entertainment and require govenment intervention.

[GunnyMo]

I still don't see why the Bible isn't banned for minors. :D

I was talking with a buddy about this the other day when we saw The Bible Game coming to PS2 this month. The bible is a great source for violence and depravity and would certainly work well in a video game enviroment.

I think that the story of King David would be fantastic! When he is collecting the 200 Philistine foreskins to complete the dowry for the princess he wants to marry you could have a Foreskin Counter as part of the HUD. Hell, it could even be a flacid penis that becomes more erect as you slice off more foreskins!

And this is just one of the many, family oriented stories taught to underage children on a daily basis by bible thumpers all over the world! yay god!

If we are going to apply "decency" standards to everything then it should be on everything. Oh wait, I forgot. Christian/Republican morality is the bastion of hypocrisy.

[Taco]

Can't see R-rated movies without a parent. NC-17 you can't even with a parent.
A lot of stores won't sell Music with a parental advisory sticker on it to minors, and there has been movements to make it a law.

Just because only one form of entertainment is currently in the spotlight does not mean other forms have not. The whole idea of restricting the sale of M and AO games to 18+ really seems pretty minor to me. The only reason I see someone having a problem is if your parent doesn't want you to play it. Which is kind of the point.

[Abednigo]

christians love doing this sort of stuff.


I still don't see why the Bible isn't banned for minors. :D

I was talking with a buddy about this the other day when we saw The Bible Game coming to PS2 this month. The bible is a great source for violence and depravity and would certainly work well in a video game enviroment.

I think that the story of King David would be fantastic! When he is collecting the 200 Philistine foreskins to complete the dowry for the princess he wants to marry you could have a Foreskin Counter as part of the HUD. Hell, it could even be a flacid penis that becomes more erect as you slice off more foreskins!

And this is just one of the many, family oriented stories taught to underage children on a daily basis by bible thumpers all over the world! yay god!

If we are going to apply "decency" standards to everything then it should be on everything. Oh wait, I forgot. Christian/Republican morality is the bastion of hypocrisy.

You guys must not know many normal Christians then. Just for the record, 99% of Christians in the public eye don't properly represent us. I get aggravated at the Pat Robertsons and Jerry Falwells of the world. They don't speak for me. I am NOT for this kind of stuff. Parents need to take responsibility (as I have said). It's not the job of the government or the game stores to make these kinds of decisions.

I just love how issues like this, someone always resorts to bashing Christians. :rolleyes:

[Taco]

Parents need to take responsibility (as I have said)

This is where you lose me. That's exactly what laws like this are intended for.

[Fontainne]

Taco:

Government restrictiction laws do not help an adult become a better parent, it gives a false sense to the parent that they don't need to do any parenting because the government is doing it for them.

If this law were to Punish the parent for exposing their children to M and AO games then yes that would be forcing the parents to take some responsibility for the act of exposing the child to "offensive" material.

This law puts fines on the Store Owner/Sales Associate for selling the game to a minor, but the parent/adult who lets their child play it receive no penalty.

Before all X rated or pornographic films a Federal warning comes up that showing this content to minors, persons under the age of (18 or 21), or to any person not wishing to see it, is punishable by fines up to 5,000 dollars and jail time.

Even the pornography law, has it right when there are punishments on both sides of the table (the seller and the adult)

I personally am against government regulation of media unless the content is explicitly designated ADULT via AO or NC-17 and X for film.

BTW there are historically films that have been rated X because of violence not nudity. the only one I can think of off the top of my head is a film called eXistance

[GunnyMo]

You are correct, Abendnigo. I should have amended my post to refer to the fundamentalist Christian than your average joe Christian. I agree with you 100%. Unfortunantly, it is that 1% of fundamentalism that is advocated by our Republican/Political leaders to gain ground with the other 99%. That is where the problem lies, I believe.

[Taco]

I disagree. People are blowing this out of proportion. All this does is strengthen the ability of a parent to control what their own kids are subjected to. It gives the parent more control, nothing else. If they were saying kids can't play these games, period, then I’d have a major problem with it. But that is not the case.


If this law were to Punish the parent for exposing their children to M and AO games then yes that would be forcing the parents to take some responsibility for the act of exposing the child to "offensive" material.

And that's exactly what I don't want. That would be taking responsibility away from the parents and fly in the face of everything you have been saying. That would be putting the responsibility for raising a child on the government.

As far as fining the store? Who cares, it's only to enforce the law and fines should be easily avoided. Do you cry for stores that sell tobacco and alcohol to underage children? That said, like I mentioned before, turning this into a judgment call like CA has is total bullshit and is unfair to stores. There needs to be a clear cut line for retailers to see.

The majority of gamers like to blame everything on parents, which is fine, I generally support that view. But it's hypocritical to say that parents need be held responsible for their children and then support taking decision making away from the parents or disagree with giving a parent more power over their children.

[Major Dan]

Face it, sooner or later you'll have to walk through a some drapes to buy M/AO games. I don't mind, it will keep my son and others from buying games like GTA, Manhunt or others, and maybe well get some games that have some sex in them.? But if they do this with games should they do it with books? I wouldn't want my 9 yr old son reading Wizards First Rule. What do you all think? :confused:

[Major Dan]

I still don't see why the Bible isn't banned for minors. :D

I was talking with a buddy about this the other day when we saw The Bible Game coming to PS2 this month. The bible is a great source for violence and depravity and would certainly work well in a video game enviroment.

I think that the story of King David would be fantastic! When he is collecting the 200 Philistine foreskins to complete the dowry for the princess he wants to marry you could have a Foreskin Counter as part of the HUD. Hell, it could even be a flacid penis that becomes more erect as you slice off more foreskins!

And this is just one of the many, family oriented stories taught to underage children on a daily basis by bible thumpers all over the world! yay god!

If we are going to apply "decency" standards to everything then it should be on everything. Oh wait, I forgot. Christian/Republican morality is the bastion of hypocrisy.
:D ROFL ROFL :D True my friend true!

[motorhappy]

The fact that an adult could put on a suit, look himself in the mirror, and then proceed to go to court to argue how it's his constitutional right to sell smut to children baffles me.

This is a common misconception of the controversy. The ESA and others are not angry because they will lose sales to minors. The ESA has forcefully encouraged game retailers to not sell M-rated games to minors. The question is whether self-restriction or government-restriction is more in line with our constitution. There are those in America who would like to see the government restrict every behavior that could be proven harmful to a person, but I'd rather leave that up to countries like Singapore. The U.S. was founded on very different principles.

Violence and sex may be something you don't like one bit, but the time will come when a law is proprosed that attempts to restrict something you don't see as harmful, or merely don't see as the government's business, and you will be happy that we live in a country with strict constitutional protections against such legislation.

[Cha-Ka]

But it's hypocritical to say that parents need be held responsible for their children and then support taking decision making away from the parents or disagree with giving a parent more power over their children.

This gives the parents power? It sounded like it gave legislators and activists all the tools they'd need to hold a legal witchhunt against any game that they decided was "too much". Setting aside issues of treating movies and games unequally, surely you can see how this can turn into activists demonizing every game that this month's wacked-out-arch-conservative-newsletter tells them to write to their congressperson about.

[Taco]

Once again, I already said several times I was against the blurred lines this particular law draws and totally 100% disagree with that aspect of it, and thus hope it gets changed or dumped. It should be M and AO all being lumped together, seperate from the rest, with no room for interpretation. If that's the case, yes, of course it gives parents more power.

And as I addressed, both movies and music have gone through similar times.

[Deathbane27]

However, neither music nor movies have laws about them. Not selling/showing R-rated movies to minors is strictly a voluntary rule by the theatre/video store companies.

IIRC, the movie/music laws were never actually made. The whining legislature accepted the self-regulation.

Video game retail chains do the same without being asked, but now suddenly we need laws to reinforce that, eh?

Fix the law and make it apply to all forms of entertainment media: Good.
This piece of crap that let's juries decide whether the sale was a crime after the fact: HELL NO.

[Taco]

They've tried to create laws. Love them or hate them, the only thing keeping it from happening is the MPAA, RIAA and the money/power backing them. It has nothing to do with public perception, that's all generated by politicians who no doubt are being well funded by the previously mentioned organizations. Bottom line is the video game industry are pushovers compared to music and video.

No way laws will ever be applied to all three at once, to many obstacles. If one breaks in others can feed off it though.

[RMan]

The question is whether self-restriction or government-restriction is more in line with our constitution.
Self-regulation is not related to law, the question is whether or not the law is unconstitutional (I do believe quite firmly that if self-regulation was working, then we wouldn’t have the law). I'm not a constitutional expert, but the bottom line is that we have a wealth of laws that demonstrate quite clearly that we do not consider children to be equipped to make the same decisions as adults, and plenty of instances of adult rights being denied to children. I question highly anyone who tries to argue that any law that applies only to children should be stuck down based on the restriction being unconstitutional for adults.

IMO, arguing that this is an infringement on freedom of expression is amazingly thin, and I do not trust the motivations. This does not limit the ability for developers to make games, or even for children to play them, just for them to buy them. I’d hope they’re not arguing that restricting retailers from selling adult material to children is limiting the retailer’s freedom of expression (I mean, come on, commerce is not expression). The quality or potential redundancy of the law could certainly be questionable, but the basis of it being unconstitutional? That’s just reaching.

This is not about some high ideal, this is about losing sales to minors, or losing retail support for adult products.

[JazGalaxy]

However, neither music nor movies have laws about them. Not selling/showing R-rated movies to minors is strictly a voluntary rule by the theatre/video store companies.

IIRC, the movie/music laws were never actually made. The whining legislature accepted the self-regulation.

Video game retail chains do the same without being asked, but now suddenly we need laws to reinforce that, eh?

Fix the law and make it apply to all forms of entertainment media: Good.
This piece of crap that let's juries decide whether the sale was a crime after the fact: HELL NO.

The apparent assumption that legally nobody should have a say in how children are raised but the parent is absolutely unfounded. We have child protection agenies who work full time every day to make sure children are kept safe from idiot adults. Adults who do thinks like stick them in the oven or as depicted in an ap arcticle from just this month, drinking their blood. If you want to be a part of society, you have to abide by the rules that society dictates. There is nothing illegal or even unprecedented about making sure that children (who aren't even protected by the laws of the constitution) are not participating in behaviors that society deems inappropriate.

Also, the idea that games are the same as movies or books is absolutely ridiculous. Name one movie or book that tells the reader/viewer to "KILL 50 people!" within a time limit. You cannot think of one. The reason you can't is because movies and books are not interactive. You can't DO anything in a book or a movie which fundamentally makes is something altogether different. How that relates to this discussion I'll let others decide, but I do think people should quit trying to make that argument. They're different, there's no reason they should be treated the same. Aside from that, trying to justfiy one thing by pointing out another wrong is immature and illogical. That's like a car theif caught red handed saying he should not be tried because, afterall, why are they worried about him when Osama Bin Laden is still out there? Just because you can buy books movies and videogames in the same store doesn't mean they have anything to do with one another.