AfterDawn: Tech news

ESA reacts to Supreme Court decision on California violent game restrictions

Written by James Delahunty (Google+) @ 27 Jun 2011 12:42 User comments (2)

ESA reacts to Supreme Court decision on California violent game restrictions The Entertainment Software Association (ESA) has issued a statement about today's U.S. Supreme Court decision to strike a California law banning the sale of violent video games to minors.
The case, which went on for six years since it was signed into law by Arnold Schwarzenegger, came to a close today when the highest court in the land sided with the decision of two lower courts. Video games can now be considered as protected speech under the First Amendment to the United States constitution.

Michael D. Gallagher, President and Chief Executive, Entertainment Software Association.
"This is a historic and complete win for the First Amendment and the creative freedom of artists and storytellers everywhere. Today, the Supreme Court affirmed what we have always known that free speech protections apply every bit as much to video games as they do to other forms of creative expression like books, movies and music. The Court declared forcefully that content-based restrictions on games are unconstitutional; and that parents, not government bureaucrats, have the right to decide what is appropriate for their children.

We are very gratified that our arguments and those of over 180 other groups and individuals from across the ideological spectrum were heard in this case. The Court has now definitively held that legislative attempts to restrict video game content will be struck down. It is time for elected officials to stop wasting time and public funds seeking unconstitutional restrictions on video games. Instead, we invite them to join with us to raise awareness and use of the highly effective tools that already exist to help that parents choose games suitable for their children."

Read the main article: Supreme Court halts California violent games law

An interesting nugget of information that I left out of the original article earlier, but I think is worth remembering (just for fun), is that this case largely came about during the mammoth political reaction to the Hot Coffee modification for Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. Do you remember that?

July 8, 2005: Investigation into San Andreas 'sex minigames' launched

July 13, 2005: Hillary Clinton to target Rockstar over San Andreas sex mod

July 22, 2005: Hot Coffee leaves San Andreas with AO rating

July 29, 2005: GTA: San Andreas banned in Australia

Aug 10, 2005: Rockstar releases patch for San Andreas minigames

Jan 29, 2006: Los Angeles sues Take-Two Interactive

Sept 3, 2009: GTA 'Hot Coffee' class action settled with $20 million payout

Leland Yee, the author of the California law struck down by the United States Supreme Court today, had alleged at the time at the Entertainment Software Ratings Board (ESRB) knew about the content in the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas game, but knowingly did not give it an "Adult Only" rating, as that would have limited the places in which the title could have been sold, under the industry's own regulations.

Previous Next  

2 user comments

127.6.2011 16:30

As so it should be... I have touted for years that simulated violence is in no way a direct correlation to violence enacted in reality.

I have researched the study with other classmates in years passed & conclusively proved this. It's a shame that all the tax dollars got thrown down the s^%tter to prove it once again.

I still believe adults should be forewarned what their kids are getting into. Kids will always fight that. It's a right of passage, we all do it. But go F your self to think you can take my right or dictate what I can or can not say or view.

I'll blog on the reasons behind this violent movies/games phenomena for those interested. Be forewarned, it can be an arduous read because it was part of a masters thesis. But I'll sass it up where I couldn't for academia.

227.6.2011 23:33

WOOT!!! I am downright shocked that the Supreme Court made this decision because it is so obviously right, but I am glad they did. Arnold is such a hypocrite it is unbelievable. He needs to stick to the only thing he has ever been good at...making people laugh with his terrible acting.

California voters: I know that you elected him because his acting is so bad that you would always know when he was lying, but why then do you not pay any attention to the crap he says and does?

Comments have been disabled for this article.

Latest user comments

News archive