New Game as Porn Bill

[Tamanegi Sensei]

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6152851.html

Check out the definition.

(1) The average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the video or computer game, taken as a whole, appeals to the minor's morbid interest in violence.
(2) The game depicts violence in a manner patently offensive to prevailing standards in the adult community with respect to what is suitable for minors.
(3) The game, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors.

Example: If I were to sell Final Fantasy X to a minor I would be sent to the slammer with a 2000 fine.

Ridiculous. Same goes to Oklahoma.

How can a game like the aformentioned X be "innapropriately violent"?

I hope the ESA will succed in this lawsuit they filed against Louisiana. The last thing they need is another blow in their already crippling economy.

[Moe]

man the US is getting silly with these laws on games... i mean come on...
"(3) The game, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors."

thats just about every game... you might as well say... games can not be sold to minors...

edit: so is this law only affective in Louisiana?

[Ritalin]

It's the Miller Test (originally used for pornography) with slightly different wordings to work for video games.

In otherwords: A load of crap.

[Yodatsubato]

Further, the legislative history supporting this bill includes much of the scientific evidence that has ended the debate as to whether these games are harmful to minors. The other states which have passed these laws were sloppy in not making the legislative record as complete as it could have been with this hard scientific evidence."
What is that Thompson guy talking about? I'm not trying to be sarcastic; I'm just curious what he's referring to by "hard scientific evidence."

[isolatedotaku]

I want to cry.

What did video games do to these people? Did an N64 steal one of their jobs as an under-payed employee at the local 7/11? Were they replaced with Mario at their desk job? Did Solid Snake sleep with their wives?

I wish they would pass some law against passing new laws.

[kLaUS]

well,, dont you guys complain, maybe its for the best. Here in my country there arent any laws against that so any kid can get those gta games and then you hear them saying what they hear in there...

altough it work out pretty great for me because when i was younger i got to play a lot of mortal kombat, and i turn out to be ok...

[Yodatsubato]

well,, dont you guys complain, maybe its for the best. Here in my country there arent any laws against that so any kid can get those gta games and then you hear them saying what they hear in there...
If the purpose of this law were to limit the exposure of violent/destructive video game behaviour to minors, it wouldn't be so vague. The writers and supporters of this law clearly wish to modify its application as time goes on. I can't think of it as anything but a move to phase out the video game industry in general.

What's the purpose of the ESRB, anyway? Isn't it for exactly this? I know that they might not be the most efficient organization, but at least they have set rules. Something that Louisiana apparently doesn't think they need.

[General Suburbia]

I want to cry.

What did video games do to these people? Did an N64 steal one of their jobs as an under-payed employee at the local 7/11? Were they replaced with Mario at their desk job? Did Solid Snake sleep with their wives?
Games took children away from their parents. And now the grownups are angry....yeah, we always feel the need to point the finger at other things.
What's the purpose of the ESRB, anyway? Isn't it for exactly this? I know that they might not be the most efficient organization, but at least they have set rules. Something that Louisiana apparently doesn't think they need.
The law's come into existance exactly because the ESRB isn't the most efficient organization. No one really enforces it or gives a damn about it, so some people feel the need to up the restrictions a bit and place more barriers onto the games that are purchased. And just so I get this out there: as stupid as I think this new law is, I'm sincerly hoping no one here would use the age-old "that's the parent's responsibility to watch over the kids" line. Random, yes, but I hate unrealistic arguments as I have just experienced one today. bleh

[Ritalin]

I'm sincerly hoping no one here would use the age-old "that's the parent's responsibility to watch over the kids" line. Random, yes, but I hate unrealistic arguments as I have just experienced one today. bleh

But it is realistic. It happened with my parents. My cousins parents. My friends parents. We all grew up on video games (violent, cute, bizarre, what-have-you) and our parents did take some of their precious time making sure it was ok, and/or we knew what was going on.

Because of that, I was able to play anything I wanted. And I did. Now I'm an adult and pretty damn successful life-wise compared to other people my age, and without any weird mental problems or compulsive urges. Perfectly normal person, who happens to love video games.

These new laws are hitting even harder because all the people who literally grew up with games are now adults and none of us are the crazy whackos that some lawyers/specialisits are saying we should be (or are, if you listen to Jack Thomspon).

Plus, I would much rather hear "it's the parents responsibility" than "it's the governments responsibility" when raising children and teaching them right from wrong.

edit: d'oh, fixed stupid wording mistakes. -.-;

[oompa loompa]

wow that law is.....lacking a better word.....GAY!!!!

thats the worst wording for a law ever..... if it dosn'thave literary political or scientific bullsh**.... what videogame besides "big brain academy" has ANY Educational F***ing purpose..... its for entertainment A$$holes!!!!!

if the parents arn't going ot teach their kids the differance between a game and reality then shoot the parents in the shoulder and piss in their wounds but don't go after everyone just cuz some political D*ck has a tree rammed up his ass and can't just tell people their retarded when they say "GTA made me do it"

sorry this kinda stuff pisses me off

[f1rst children]

wow that law is.....lacking a better word.....GAY!!!!

thats the worst wording for a law ever..... if it dosn'thave literary political or scientific bullsh**.... what videogame besides "big brain academy" has ANY Educational F***ing purpose..... its for entertainment A$$holes!!!!!

Actually, I would expect any half-decent lawyer to be able to show "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors." And not just "Brain Age"-type games.

Scientific value:
Many games encourage and develop problem solving skills. The most obvious of these are puzzle games. Also included are adventure games, many platformers, etc.

Studies of gamers have shown they possess higher than average hand-eye coordination and visual acuity. In one study, doctors who played or had played video games committed 37% less mistakes than those who didn't in performing laproscopic surgery, while performing the surgery 27% faster.

Literary/artistic value:
Some games encourage textual literacy, ie the classic "book" definition. Others encourage visual literacy, akin to post-modern art or interior design. Certainly the message of say, the dangers of artificial intelligence is as socially redeeming in System Shock 2 as it is in any Terminator movie.

Political value:
This is a freaking softball. Games, especially MMO, can function just as much as forums for social interaction as they can for any electronic entertainment device. People meet, make friends and enemies, engage in social and anti-social behavior, and even make direct political statements all through the construct of video games. Even the US Army uses video games as a political tool.

All this is part of the reason why the 8th US Circuit of Appeals ruled:
"If the First Amendment is versatile enough to 'shield [the] painting of Jackson Pollock, music of Arnold Schoenberg, or Jabberwocky verse of Lewis Carroll,' we see no reason why the pictures, graphic design, concept art, sounds, music, stories, and narrative present in video games are not entitled to a similar protection. The mere fact that they appear in a novel medium is of no legal consequence."

[Yodatsubato]

Actually, I would expect any half-decent lawyer to be able to show "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors." And not just "Brain Age"-type games.

Scientific value:
Many games encourage and develop problem solving skills. The most obvious of these are puzzle games. Also included are adventure games, many platformers, etc.

Studies of gamers have shown they possess higher than average hand-eye coordination and visual acuity. In one study, doctors who played or had played video games committed 37% less mistakes than those who didn't in performing laproscopic surgery, while performing the surgery 27% faster.

Literary/artistic value:
Some games encourage textual literacy, ie the classic "book" definition. Others encourage visual literacy, akin to post-modern art or interior design. Certainly the message of say, the dangers of artificial intelligence is as socially redeeming in System Shock 2 as it is in any Terminator movie.

Political value:
This is a freaking softball. Games, especially MMO, can function just as much as forums for social interaction as they can for any electronic entertainment device. People meet, make friends and enemies, engage in social and anti-social behavior, and even make direct political statements all through the construct of video games. Even the US Army uses video games as a political tool.
The problem is the open-endedness of the laws. Everybody is going to interpret what constitutes "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value" differently. The points you have listed may be valid from the point of the defendent's lawyer, but neither the jury nor the state needs to agree with their definitions.

Just because something is vague does not mean it is easily defendable. It may be even harder, since you have to find out the jury's definitions' and paradigms before you can even begin to defend your case. So, the defendant starts off behind. It's the exact opposite of "innocent until proven guilty."

[Roark]

The problem is the open-endedness of the laws. Everybody is going to interpret what constitutes "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value" differently. The points you have listed may be valid from the point of the defendent's lawyer, but neither the jury nor the state needs to agree with their definitions.

Just because something is vague does not mean it is easily defendable. It may be even harder, since you have to find out the jury's definitions' and paradigms before you can even begin to defend your case. So, the defendant starts off behind. It's the exact opposite of "innocent until proven guilty."
Actually, that's exactly the reason courts strike something like this down. Undefinable also = non-enforceable. Plus vague wordings don't make good laws.

That and "community standards" is recognized as a load of bovine fecal matter.

[f1rst children]

It is, as Ritalin said, the 3-pronged obscenity definition from Miller v CA.

Thompson and his cronies have miscalculated a bit though, I think.

First, excessive violence is much less likely to violate community standards than excessive sexuality, and even laws restricting virtual depictions and electronic representations of sexual obscenity have been struck down, such as the Child Online Protection Act, Communications Decency Act, and the Child Pornography Prevention Act.

Further in Reno v ACLU part of the reason the SCOTUS struck down the COPA was "Because it is possible to warn viewers about incipient indecent content (unlike radio, where warnings fail to protect all potential listeners)..." This seems to relate directly to games, just like it does to movies. ESRB ratings are designed to inform about the game's content and prevent the audience from being blindsided by offensive material. Yes, there was a high-profile mistake made with GTA:SA but I can't see that as a compelling reason to shut down the entire ratings system, anymore than a 15 year old sneaking into an R rated movie is reason to discard the MPAA.

Yes, Thompson is a high-profile jackhole, and this Louisiana law will get his mug on TV for another 15 undeserved minutes. Luckily, the games industry has so far had the backing of the courts, which have granted video games the strict scrutiny protections of any other free speech, including the 6th, 7th and 8th US Appellate Circuits.

The argument of the Thompsons is that gaming's interactiveness means it isn't speech. But in AAMA v Kendrick the 6th Circuit ruled "All literature... is interactive; the better it is, the more interactive."

In restricting speech available to minors, the Thompsons have argued that the Ginsberg test of "disgusting or degrading" is sufficient to ban minors' access. Yet the Court has never applied the Ginsberg test in relation to violence, only to sexually explicit materials.

[7Raven7]

Jeez, now I'm going to have kids asking me to buy video games for them instead of cigarettes...

[f1rst children]

Federal judge blocks Louisiana game law for now (http://www.2theadvocate.com/news/3192336.html)

Hearing on making the injunction permanent to follow.

[Yodatsubato]

U.S. District Judge James Brady late last week issued a temporary restraining order barring authorities from enforcing the measure.
I wish I understood how these political processes work. What's a "temporary restraining order?" I thought that's only something for people... It sounds kinda funny if you try applying that same definition between a bill and a judicial system.

[Ritalin]

Federal judge blocks Louisiana game law for now (http://www.2theadvocate.com/news/3192336.html)

Hearing on making the injunction permanent to follow.

This does not suprise me. The Millers Test barely came into being and has since been challenged quite often (but never reaching the Supreme Court again). It's a flimsy law that doesn't have any backbone.

And since this game law is the Miller Test just aimed at games instead, I highly doubt it'll go through. The original intent for the test -- pornography -- has a higher chance to stick than one aimed at games.

Edit;

I wish I understood how these political processes work. What's a "temporary restraining order?" I thought that's only something for people... It sounds kinda funny if you try applying that same definition between a bill and a judicial system.

What they mean is an Injunction, which is a temporary hold on certain activities, in this case--law making. Restraining orders are a type of Injunction that you hear about more often with regular civilians.