Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Videogames

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT
 

Reading the ruling, wow the court basically told California what to go do with itself.

It's a good day for freedom!

SteelStallion:
I don't fully understand the case, could someone explain to me what's wrong here?

I mean, they're voting for a law that prohibits the sale of adult rated games to minors. Isn't that how movies work as well? What's the issue here?

Sorry I'm not American so I don't really get it, just curious lol.

Well that was actually part of the issue, movies have a voluntary rating system imposed by the industry and enforced by the distributors. Since this exists there is no compelling interest for the government to regulate. One of the primary arguments the EMA made was that the E-T-M system was similar and thus regulation was unnecessary.

California also cannot show that the Act's restrictions meet the alleged substantial need of parents who wish to restrict their children's access to violent videos. The video-game industry's voluntary rating system already accomplishes that to a large extent. Moreover, as a means of assisting parents the Act is greatly overinclusive, since not all of the children who are prohibited from purchasing violent video games have parents who disapprove of their doing so.

*bursts through a wall* OOHHH YEAAAHHH

Time for a celebratory holiday, I think.

No words can describe how I feel about this. So I'll just have Twilight Sparkle sum up my feelings:

hue

I'm not going to say this decision isn't a good thing, but I'm kind of glad that I wasn't allowed to play M-rated games as a kid. But I guess that's never going to change, because minors still can't get M-rated games from anywhere without a valid ID.

This one's for the history books I guess... Nice work guys ;)

Well obviously on that note then:

I mean seriously, I don't even live in the US but I've been following this for a while since there are many great US developers and this could have affected them.

Gamers, we won!

Frehls:
Unfortunately, looking at some comments on the matter on other news sites, most people are still in favor of restricting video games in such a way.
Given the ignorance of many people on just how the ESRB and retailers work, even on this very site, I sincerely doubt this is the end.

I'm quite sure this is the end. Scalia's decision is broad and comprehensive, while the public may take time to come around to our side the legal challenges are for all intents and purposes over.

Yeah, I knew we would win this one. Nice job, Supreme Court.

SteelStallion:
I don't fully understand the case, could someone explain to me what's wrong here?

I mean, they're voting for a law that prohibits the sale of adult rated games to minors. Isn't that how movies work as well? What's the issue here?

Sorry I'm not American so I don't really get it, just curious lol.

No, it never said anything about M rated games. It said "violent" games. So basically instead of it being a policy to not sell M rated games to a 10 year old like it is pretty much everywhere, it would be illegal to sell a game like say Ratchet & Clank to a 17 year old because it was deemed "violent." That's wrong.

And also the point isn't whether you believe M rated games should be sold to little kids, it's whether they believed that games are any different from films, paintings, novels, etc. So if it had passed, video games would have been treated on the same level as porn and cigarettes. That would have done a lot of damage to video games as a whole. We're already an industry that doesn't like to take risks, so if it would be illegal to take these risks, we'd seriously be dwindled down to nothing but Animal Crossing and while there's nothing wrong with Animal Crossing and nonviolent games like it, I happen to enjoy my LA Noire...

I think this occasion calls for this:

Frehls:
Unfortunately, looking at some comments on the matter on other news sites, most people are still in favor of restricting video games in such a way.
Given the ignorance of many people on just how the ESRB and retailers work, even on this very site, I sincerely doubt this is the end.

Generally the supreme court is the end for just about everything. Also what websites are you looking at I cruised over to CNN.com and everyone there seem to be in favor of this decision.

I've read through (most of) the opinion now. This is the best part, IMO:

The State's evidence is not compelling. California relies primarily on the research of Dr. Craig Anderson and a few other research psychologists whose studies purport toshow a connection between exposure to violent video games and harmful effects on children. These studies have been rejected by every court to consider them, and with good reason: They do not prove that violent video games cause minors to act aggressively (which would at least be a beginning). Instead, "[n]early all of the researchis based on correlation, not evidence of causation, and most of the studies suffer from significant, admitted flaws in methodology." Video Software Dealers Assn. 556 F. 3d, at 964. They show at best some correlation between expo-sure to violent entertainment and minuscule real-world effects, such as children's feeling more aggressive or mak-ing louder noises in the few minutes after playing a vio-lent game than after playing a nonviolent game.

(Emphasis mine).

Good stuff.

This is great news. Rejoice everyone!

crotalidian:
Fantastic a great Step towards acceptance.

Do we know if their is an appeal planne dor do SCOTUS Rulings prevent Appeal?

As far as I know, the SCOTUS is the ultimate last word on legal matters (i.e. you have one shot).

OT: HELL YEAH! This just made my week!

I believe some victory music is called for:

Yee, Ah-nold, Brown, Harris...you just got PWNED

I realy want to see the Fox news reaction to this. I'm predicting epic rants followed by meltdowns by several "reporters".

take that you ignorant people who think videogames are a bad influence. Games have so much potential, this gives us the oppertunity to demonstrate this to the world and make this a change for the better.
Ludus Florentis Invicta! (or something like that)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_17UlaToL3c&feature=related

IT'S A GREAT DAY FOR BLACK PEOPLE OF ALL RACES!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuC9bmxw1Bg#start=0:43;end=0:46

And gamers, I guess.

THANKS, JIM STERLING. You did good, man.

i actually yelled out loud at work upon reading this article! What fantastic news.

Well now them terrible politicians can finally do their job and actually spend them tax payer money on something useful.

falcon1985:
I realy want to see the Fox news reaction to this. I'm predicting epic rants followed by meltdowns by several "reporters".

Nah man they'll just tell people that the government is allowing children to play violent sexual games and that this is what is wrong with America.

Hey, old people aren't 100% useless, alright!

Sweet im glad they ruled in favor of games.

falcon1985:
Victory to common sense, for once...

This! As rarely as this occurs, it needs to be mentioned whenever it actually DOES occur.

mikey7339:
I am so glad for this and that the system worked they way it is supposed to for a change. Is this the end of all this nonsense that has been thrown at video games for the past twenty years?

I would say its the start of the end of this ignorance towards the industry. As for the news itself, HELL YES!!! Suck it Fox News!!!

SteelStallion:
I don't fully understand the case, could someone explain to me what's wrong here?

I mean, they're voting for a law that prohibits the sale of adult rated games to minors. Isn't that how movies work as well? What's the issue here?

Sorry I'm not American so I don't really get it, just curious lol.

I'm not an American myself but from what I understand (having read about 1/3 of the pdf) the Californian law would have enforced parenting decisions onto parents.

Then again I may be wrong in that one (haven't finished reading yet).

Oh It is a glorious day in the gaming world today! A toast! A toast I say! To the forward movement of games, the creation of games, and gaming! Cheers!

Macgyvercas:

crotalidian:
Fantastic a great Step towards acceptance.

Do we know if their is an appeal planne dor do SCOTUS Rulings prevent Appeal?

As far as I know, the SCOTUS is the ultimate last word on legal matters (i.e. you have one shot).

OT: HELL YEAH! This just made my week!

it could always go back to the SCOTUS but that rarely happens.

There aren't enough capital letters or approving phrases to show how happy I am for this!

A victory for logic and common sense over idiocy and scare-mongering. It's a good day to like videogames. As M. Bison would say:

Good on the old geezers!

If you read through the decision write-up, they basically told California to shove it in deep.

Aw man, and I was so looking foreward to exploding Fox people. I have my popcorn ready and everything. Guess i'll have to go play some violent videogames then. :D

The Dark Umbra:

Macgyvercas:

crotalidian:
Fantastic a great Step towards acceptance.

Do we know if their is an appeal planne dor do SCOTUS Rulings prevent Appeal?

As far as I know, the SCOTUS is the ultimate last word on legal matters (i.e. you have one shot).

OT: HELL YEAH! This just made my week!

it could always go back to the SCOTUS but that rarely happens.

It can, though typically once the Supreme Court tells you something, you say "Yes Your Honor".

Ok, I'm from the UK where we have the BBFC rating system and most violent games can only be brought by people over 18, and I'm now really confused as to how it works in the US.

So it's not illegal for retailers to sell R rated games to anyone, but they have the choice to refuse the sale, right? So instead of your elected government being in control (by proxy, whatever) of what content children can access, some random at Gamestop is? Sounds pretty odd to me.

Our system seems to work fine. I was playing 18+ games when I was younger, as my parents would buy them for me. Essentially this means that parents have much more control over what there kids play/watch etc, which is surely the way it should be? Kids are not born rational and responsible, they have to learn it, and most of that comes from parents.

Sorry to use the go-to example, but look at the airport level in MW2. Personally I felt a little sick playing it, and was very impressed that a game could have that much of an impact on me, but I don't know if I would want to expose a kid to that. They have their entire adult lives to explore the darker parts of humanity, childhoods supposed to be about fun!

It seems to me that the majority of people think that babies pop out the womb fully formed rational human beings, they are not! They are blank slates affected by everything there senses take in, look at the Mozart Effect for example. Of course being exposed to violence at a young age has an effect on people, I don't claim to know how much, or really in what way, but that's because of the massive amount of conflicting research that I can't really be bothered to sift through, that's for someone else to decide, thankfully we have the BBFC.

I don't really know where this rant came from, but I hope I managed to make my point at least vaguely clear.

I find myself agreeing with Scalia? Wow, not only has hell suddenly popped into existence, it also completely froze over...
But good decision regardless of who voted for what. Games should be protected like any other medium.

Life is good.

Is this an end to these kind of laws though? What's to stop them from slightly changing their argument to try to pass this asinine law again?

Good to hear this ended in our favor with little to no middle ground in the result.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here