Massachusetts “Games-As-Porn” Bill
With Boston becoming a big hub for video game development, and with me living and working here, I’m especially concerned about the bill that could potentially classify games in the same category as pornography, therefore making it illegal to sell certain games to minors. I don’t suspect House Bill 1423 will pass as long as the First Amendment still exists, but seeing attacks against the industry is unsettling either way. There’s more information at GamePolitics.com. Some points below the fold.
These come from Kent Quirk, but I don’t see any need to reword them.
- Please oppose House Bill 1423.
- This bill would violate the First Amendment rights of video game developers and the public for whom we make video games. In particular, on Monday a federal appeals court confirmed a ban on a similar law in Minnesota (and several others in the past). The bill is a waste of taxpayers’ money.
- The video game industry has an effective rating system in place to distinguish which games are not appropriate for minors. In particular, it’s more effective and provides far more information than the ratings system in place for movies.
- Some of the best and most innovative games on the market lately have come from Massachusetts companies. The Massachusetts game industry is booming, employs thousands of people and provides many hundreds of millions of dollars annually to the Massachusetts economy. H. 1423 sends the wrong message, that Massachusetts does not welcome the video game development industry.
The most disturbing part is that the bill is so poorly and openly worded. How do you determine what “depicts violence in a manner patently offensive to prevailing standards in the adult community, so as to appeal predominantly to the morbid interest in violence of minors;”? What’s the meter stick here? By what’s on TV?
Thats what you get for living in Mass.
That’s what you get for living in the US.
Games as porn? Maybe “games as alcohol” or “games as driving” or “games as getting into an R rated movie” maybe? What’s the big problem with having rules about what games younger kids have access to? To deny or skew the message is to… well deny that maybe it’s not appropriate for kids to play certain games. It works for movies and works fine - and cleanly and clearly puts the onus on the parent to be the responsible “they got it because I approved it” party.
Text of the bill if anyone doesn’t want to click the link…
All it says to me is “we recognize that there is video content inappropriate for minors and we are amending this to include video games”
The only real issue is who decides what games are on that list? If it’s the ESRB that’s fine by me.