Michigan and Louisiana Lose
Another bit of good news on the legal side of things in the game industry: Michigan now owes the ESA over $180,000 for their violent game law. The ESA is also seeking monetary recompense for their recent win against Louisiana’s anti-violent game law. That brings the total owed to the Electronic Software Association by various states to more than $1.5 million, with Illinois, Washington, St. Louis, and Indianapolis owing them for legal battles already.
Go ESA!
Maybe when taxpayers start realizing their money is going bye-bye because of their ignorance, people will learn.
Probably not, but we can at least hope that the politicians can learn by example, right?
Probably not. =/
We realize that our money is going bye-bye for a number of reasons that we don’t necessarily like, but that apparently isn’t enough to get people to stop being passive and really take action to remedy the situation.
But government frustration aside, I’m very happy to see that at least the justice department is doing it’s job well and striking down these ridiculous arguments… Though I doubt it will ever end, it just comes in waves/cycles.
The only thing I can say here is it’s good for somebody to teach the government they can’t babysit The People in every regard. Personal responsibility is the key when it comes to things like video games; or to quote the staff here on weekends we host hockey teams, “Where the heck are the PARENTS?!?!?!”I wholeheartedly agree that people won’t get involved in politics (i.e. educated voting) just because some of their money is lost to these lawsuits. The amount of political indifference in the USA is staggering, but don’t you dare touch my PlayStation 3! It’s mine, and my pal eBay is looking forward to it.(No, I didn’t buy a PS3 to resell, I’m just trying to make a point.)
I swear I put some breaks in that, but they didn’t stick. My pardon for the wall of text.
I am a little bit confused by this post. Let me first preempt my comment by saying:
1: I do not work in the gaming industry
2: I do not profess to be a laywer or in any way have expert knowledge of the situation
3: My understanding of the law (esp–> the louisiana one) Is limited to an article listed here:
http://promomagazine.com/legal/esa_videogame_law_062006/
If I read this right, and I quote:
“The lawsuit, filed by the ESA and the Entertainment Merchants Association, seeks to overturn the bill that would fine retailers between $100 and $2,000 and/or up to a year prison sentence for selling, leasing or renting violent video games to children under 18. Restricted games would include M-rated (Mature) games for consumers 17 and older (for example, Take Two’s and Rockstar Games’ Grand Theft Auto) and AO-rated (Adult Only) games for consumers 18 and older (think Vivendi Universal’s Leisure Suit Larry).”
Granted, some of the other information about other bills (Oaklahoma, for example) seem a bit different/retarded. (IE–> segregating violence like porn)
However, if this is the extent of the Louisiana bill –> simply to enforce minors not being able to buy, on their own, media that has a rating of 18+ on it.. or rathar.. to fine retailers who *do* allow minors to buy it … Then I am 100% in favor of the bill and it is a tradegy that the bill has been overturned.
That said, I find it unlikely that this is the case & I must me missing out on some part of this issue.
Surely you are not suggesting that minors should be able to purchase “Mature” or “18+” without parental consent. Surely you are not suggesting that retailers should *not* be punished if they do, indeed, sell 18+ material to a 13 yr old. The same policies/rules apply to Movies, tobacco, alcohol, and live ‘adult’ entertainment. Granted, there are some difference in alcohol and GTA: San Andreas as far as leality are concerned.
Probably I must have some hole in my knowledge of the situation.. or the law must have some more extenuating aspect that is more foolish.
As a Louisiana voter, I voted against this measure. Not because I think that the theory behind it was wrong, but the execution left plenty to be desired. The way this law is written, it is unconstitutional in its wording and unenforceable in its application.
I personally am in favor of two things when it comes to keeping inappropriate material out of the hands of children.
1) Parents. Parents need to be aware of what their children are buying and playing. Parents are the only people who know their children well enough to know if their particular fifteen year old is mature enough to handle whatever game is in question. If they are able to handle it, then the parent can help the kid buy the game. If not, its a parental call. Grow up and raise your children, people!
2) Retailer Accountability. The gaming industry has done a damn fine job of self-regulation over the years in that companies seek out and prominently display ESRB ratings. Movie theaters that allow unaccompanied minors into R rated flicks and corner stores that sell tobacco, alcohol, or pornography to the underaged face fines and other legal action, so why not hold game retailers accountable for not asking for an ID when junior comes to the register with a game clearly labeled 18+?
Louisiana already has a law that allows minors to possess and consume otherwise illegal products (tobacco, R rated movies, porn, ect) when in the presence of a legal guardian, and provides that no penalty be taken against the legal guardian when use of these products does not result in any harm to anyone (admittedly, I think this is a bad idea in the case of alcohol and tobacco, barring the prom-night toast of champagne). Why not re-model the game law to that standard? Retailers are accountable for selling mature material for minors, but parents can still buy said material for their children if they find it to be acceptable without having to fear negative legal repercussions.
Finally, I think that the “anti-violence gaming laws” should not be viewed negatively by the gaming community. I think they should be embraced so that they can be taken out of the hands of self-righteous ignorant busy-bodies with nothing better to do than regulate other people’s lives. By accepting such laws, the gaming industry and community can continue its long-standing tradition of self-regulation by influencing the content of this type of legislation. The industry has done its part by clearly labeling each game with an indication of content. It’s time that retailers honor that label.
I’ve reviewe the law & the resons it is so horrible in better detail here:
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/commentary.aspx?id=16183
I agree wholeheartedly with Scarlet’s comments and applaud her for making a much more educated & sensible commentary than my previous one. Thnx Ryan, Scarlet & everyone for the education
I feel much more informed about the topic now & better equipped to discuss it in public.
(No thats not sarcasm, I really appreciate this post/debate/commentary list for its informative value)
Come chat with sexy cam girls…
…