Arizona Bill Worries Video Game Industry
Arizona Bill Worries Video Game Industry
April 7, 2008
A piece of legislation under consideration today by the Arizona State Senate has video game industry representatives concerned.HB 2660, which was passed by a 36-23 vote in the Arizona House of Representatives last month, would make content producers, publishers and distributors liable for monetary damages if any written, audio, visual or digital material from which they profited was judged to have been "dangerous" or obscene and motivated someone to commit a felony or an act of terrorism.
The Arizona Daily Star reports that Keith Perkins, an attorney who runs the victims advocacy group Never Again Foundation, said that those who profit from such material should be held responsible. Perkins wrote the measure, which is sponsored by Republican Warde Nichols (left).
Representatives for content creators, however, say the measure goes too far:
A representative for the Motion Picture Association of America, Wendy Briggs, said House Bill 2660 is overly broad. She said the legislation... could result in lawsuits against people involved in mainstream movies. Briggs, who also represents video game producers, said they, too, could be liable for items she would consider harmless.
Briggs used a flight simulator game as an example:
Should I now be reasonably sure that that's going to incite somebody to commit an act of terror? What about a movie, or a book, that teaches you how to shoot a gun straight?
The Video Game Voters Network, operated by the Entertainment Software Association, which represents U.S. video game publishers, has issued an alert to members, urging them to contact their elected officials about the bill.
GP: The industry is legitimately concerned about this bill, which would have a chilling effect, certainly on game developers. Who gets to decide, for example, whether content is "dangerous"? What does that mean, exactly? Does violent content make media dangerous? Is Manhunt 2 dangerous? Call of Duty 4? Saving Private Ryan? Beowulf? The Bible?
Comments
These bills would get shot to pieces and the politicians backpedal so fast...
This "problem" is not going away anytime soon. There are many politicians-especially right now, who would rather point fingers than try to deal with a problem.
i feel bad for rap and R&B and rock music.
jeez guys
the problem is canada.
sarchasim
Oh, the lawyers...
I don't know what I mean by that, but it's a feeling I have..
i've been hired by the good people of arisona to stop the devil breaking out of them there dvd comics!
What is the it?
If you mean the law makers, then yes I'm inclined to agree, it seems they are getting desperate and the courts are having none of it.
If you mean the game makers, then please explain.
Nazi material, religious material, heck any written material can't be held responsible for the actions of others.
For that matter, so is saying that something 'motivated someone to commit a felony.' If a mentally ill person, after an afternoon of playing GTA, were to steal his neighbor's gun and go on a rampage, what motivated him? The game? The illness? The availability of a firearm? I think that proving such motivation came from a game or movie is nigh-impossible - and if the link were provable, it probably means that the movie or game is 'inciting imminent violence' and would already be liable under existing criminal and civil law.
And the fact that the law was written by a victim's advocacy lawyer... this sounds to me like said lawyer just wants to make it easier to reach into the media's deep pockets whenever a tragedy occurs.
There is no chance that this would pass constitutional muster. The federal courts have been brutal in striking down laws and lawsuits that try to hold content providers for that actions of individuals.
This clown Perkins needs his head examined.
Arizona bill = will fail
Massachusetts bill = will fail
Our tax dollars = down the shitter
What i do not understand is why now?
Are they hoping to swamp the mention of this bill with the presidential pre-elections or what are they trying to pull here, that's the 3rd one in a relatively short period of time, the two previous ones were bounced, but still it is worrisome that they're all so closely timed.
These legislators need a reality check. Anything can be used responsibly or abused; it's the responsibility of the user--or the user's guardian if s/he's a minor--to make sure the item is used in a proper way.
People need to be responsible for their own actions; passing the blame will only make things worse in the long run.
As well, it takes causation out of the equation, allowing the "Games made me do it" defence to be used, and have the developer take the fall instead.
It's like everyone in a car manufacturing plant facing murder charges because they built the car that a serial murder used to run people over. Who would want to be in the buisness then?
Starting Lineup
1. "The Turner Diaries"
2. " Magnum Force"
3. " The Warriors"
4. "Jackass"
5. "Doom"
6. "The Basketball Diaries"
7. "Grand Theft Auto" (Series)
8. "Catcher in the Rye"
9. "Halo" (Series)
As mentioned in the article, HB2660 is so overly broad that any judge could interpret almost anything (film, music, books, games) to have influenced, and thus violated such a law. I could see many a citizen trying to file civil suits alleging that they were harmed by someone influenced by a film and going after a movie studio (because they have the money). Whoever wrote this law needs to go back to "law writing class" because they obviously were asleep for a good portion of the class.
Let's just absolve everybody of personal responsibility why don't we? Big surprise a sue-happy lawyer is partially responsible for this legislation. He'll be able to chase tragedies all day.
Then there's Loony Toons, pretty much any war documentary, the evening news, text books, ZOMG, there's harmful violence everywhere! Ban everything, initiate Care Bearism!
If this, by some unforeseen nightmare ot judicial incompetence did stand, it would be a disaster, not only for the media, but for other industries as well.
If we don't currently hold GM & Smith&Wesson accountable for the things people do with their products, how can we hold EA and Warner Brothers responsible for things people saw in their products?
The whole idea just doesn't make sense.
It reminds me of the same people who were terrified of comic books in the 50's and 60's. "They're rotting children's brains!" "They're violent!" "They're full of smut!".
Fast forward to now, and they're the basis of more summer blockbusters than anything else in the last 10 years.
Personally, I think the interactivity scares people more than anything else, and gives them the ability to persuade otherwise intelligent people into thinking that games have some sort of negative impact. Given enough time, or the next big thing, common sense 'should' prevail. One can hope, at least.
Rather than going on the 'games are bad' route which has a proven fail record, they are now broadening the scope with the confidence that if they pass a law telling everyone they can now sue the big companies for every hardship and horror, then it has more chance of passing.
Come on, the 'Sue to absolve myself of responsibility and get rich' mentality has more legs than the 'bad game' angle.
This crap is why people hate lawyers.
Eh?
Ok, so maybe i'm jumping the gun, but my point is, and again this is a point I keep making, the industry HAS TO STOP PLAYING NICE!
Screw the PR problems, screw whatever issues it might create in the public image, the industry needs to send a clear message to the politicans.
Fuck with us, we will break your bank and your carrer. All they have to due is point to Jack and say. "See this man, who fancies himself our most able and abiding critic? Yeah, he's about to lose his law license. Care to join him on the un employment line? "
Forget winning or losing, forget the media or political backlash. Lets force the politicos to start facing there own music.
Then maybe they'll shut the fuck up and leave us the hell alone.
I'd personally like it to be an Axe too, but one step at a time.
Monkeythumbs had it right.
Have a shooting, or even just a beating up of someone, like the recent shooting at an Oxnard school, over an apparently homosexual student.
Search the criminal's home for religious text.
Blame the religious text and religion.
Multi-million dollar lawsuits against the publisher of the religious text.
And, if their religion organizes, such as a church, discover if the religion preaches bigotry and hate against homosexuals.
Multi-million dollar lawsuits against the church.
And, hey, if the church claims immunity or demands that they are protected by the First Amendment...
SHOVE "PROTECT THE CHILDREN" DOWN THEIR THROATS (FIGUREATIVELY SPEAKING OF COURSE)!
Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
Then challenge the law in court or let the state fix its own problems.
Where the hell do they grown these pod like humans? I can't believe this passed in America. This country ios going straight down the shitter I swear.
I'm not too surprised as politicians, from both parties, often go with such lazy legislation as it makes it appear that they are "doing something" about the social ills. But it's only appearences. Even if this bill were to pass (and it doesn't have a snow ball's chance in hell) it would achieve nothing except tying up the Arizona courts in a plethora of though crime-esque legal battles.
If you really want to cut-back on felonies and crime, promote legislation that would have a tangible effect on society. Attract jobs to your state as an area with a good economy has less crime due to people not feeling so desperate. Promote electives in schools such as art and music so kids, especially teens, have an outlet of their angst. Ensure that the gun laws on the books are enforced properly so that psychos like Cho never get their hands on weapons in the first place. Make sure there are enough polic on the street to curb crime.
Of course, to do all that requires actual effort and time and politicians these days only care about getting elected so we end up having crap like this. And for the record I deplore these massacre chaster lawyers as they exploit a tragedy for money and face time.
Ok, I'm done ranting.
Actually, if I'm not mistaken about the wording:
"3. The person knew, should have known or recklessly disregarded a significant risk that the material would substantially assist, encourage or result in another person committing terrorism or a felony offense."
It's not simply "inspiring" the person to commit the crime, it could be providing the means to commit it. Which again brings us back to events like suing an automaker because a loved one was killed in a hit and run.
The manufacturer provided the "assist" to the crime, and a car is a dangerous object, and the manufacturers do know that.
So, it seems that this bill is trying to open up the way to pretty much sue everything in existence. Not that it will stand up to scrutiny as it is so f****** vague that it makes me ill. Go solve a real problem, guys.
An exceptional piece of legal garbage that not only enables the "GTA made me do it!" excuse, but it *rewards* it.
Don't want to be responsible for something? Play a video game and blame that afterward! Then you'll get off scott-free and you'll be able to litigate against the video game makers!
Now then, suppose this ridiculous law passes, and it so enrages some nutjob that he decides to commit acts of violence against the Arizona legislature or some of its members. Could the AZ legislature then be sued for creating "written material" (the law itself) which "motivated someone to commit a felony?"
I guess I shouldn't be surprised that they haven't really thought it through, but you'd think they'd at least be aware of the abject failure of all similar laws in otehr states.
Little Johnny went to school one day with a gun in his back pack. Little Johnny shot eight of his classmates as well as three faculty members before turning the weapon on himself. The police looked into Little Johnny's background. They found that he came from a broken home, was on anti-depressants, and he often went hunting with his father. His step-father had been arrested for domestic abuse of Little Johnny twice. Little Johnny had stacks of nazi propaganda in his room and all of his victims were minorities. The police found a copy of Grand Theft Auto in the room next to a rather offensive suicide note, denoting the various ethnic groups he thought were destroying the planet.
What do you think the media is going to talk about?
Ok, story time is over. I am quite sick of all of these attempts at legislating free speech. The fact of the matter is that the KKK can march down the street in broad daylight, but video games are constantly being attacked by politicians as what is wrong with kids today. You want to know what is wrong with kids today? They are still kids. Eventually, every generation takes the next step. I just hope when the current powers that be fade into obscurity, the next ones will remember what we have dealt with.
Among many many other things, including philosophies he learned through studying Scientology (which would explain a lot IMO but I digress).
If I jump on a turtle and the turtle dies, Nintendo is culpable of cruelty to animals. If I then kick the dead turtle into something and it breaks, Nintendo is charged with vandalism as well.
The Muppet Babies cartoon encouraged the audience to use their imagination. I can imagine a lot of things, and I can use my imagination to plan out my actions. Therefore, Jim Henson Productions is liable for anything I do.
Murders and Terrorism caused by the Bible - 10,000,000 +
Millions upon millions....upon millions have killed, assaulted and have committed suicide over it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_and_present_danger
By that same reasoning the pilot instructors who taught terrorists how to fly planes should be liable for damages due to the collapse of the Twin Towers in New York.
Good story. Sad but too true these days. Personal responsibility is out the window and means all most nothing now to most Americans from what I can see. What a sad state of affairs.
I'm really grateful we don't have to go through this nonsense in Canada.
Oh no.
GP: Vinnie, change your user name - final warning....
The Supreme Court likes specificity, it would, in fact, have a BETTER chance of passing if it did explicitly ban video games or something like that. But this bill basically punishes everything and anything that "inspires" bad thoughts/actions.
This is just ridiculous, whoever proposed this bill should be thrown out for wasting time.
All fundamentalist groups suck. Not just Christians. Extremists of any color or stripe are just illogical and lame. That is the nature of the world. There will always be some group of asshats that think they know what is best for everyone.
BTW, I am a spiritual anarchist. ;) (I am not a political anarchist.)
Then go kill yourself, because you can't escape Christianity. It's also stupid to think that a Christian belief is behind all of this. Christ said three things applicable here: "turn the other cheek", "you who is without sin, cast the first stone", and "before removing the speck from your brother's eye, remove the plank from your own".
@ vinniethewop - Right on brotha. My shrink kept telling me that everything that happened bad to me was the fault of my depression. Turns out if I just get off my ass and fix the problem, the problem goes away. Incidentally, paying for the shrink was one of those problems that went away too :)
Remember when people said "this lawsuit will never win" back when that fellow sued McDonalds because 'his coffee was hot' making millions? Obviously this is different in context, but there are similiarities:
All it takes is one.
All it takes is one of these anti-videogame laws to pass, and then there is more, and more, and more, until the USA is destroyed.
I'm not saying this one will pass.. but one day, god forbid, one might. And that's all it takes.
25. Bills of attainder; ex post facto laws; impairment of contract obligations
"Section 25. No bill of attainder, ex-post-facto law, or law impairing the obligation of a contract, shall ever be enacted."
Except with that lawsuit it had nothing to do with the constiution, while this has everything to do with it. you're compairing apples and oranges. true, it only takes one to win, but they all failed under the same exact reasons. and we have qoutes of those politicians saying they knew it would fail. they are in no way planning these things to pass, they just want good fluff to add to their campaigns later.
Blaming the Christian doctrine is different than blaming certain Christians. And while some of the Christians are making the laws, other Christians are fighting it. The difference is, the defenders don't make as big a stink about their Christianity. Frankly, it's not good to bring up "Christians" as a negative at all, since without clarification it paints all of us in the bad light.
Who are these politicians? Where are their heads?
It's frightening to me how inept our elected officials are.
I refer back to Yuki's comment to summarize my position; enough is enough. The industry needs to stop being concerned about these bills and go on the offensive. Go start some shit. Educate these morons on those rights they're supposedly sworn to protect.
And as Yuki suggests, maybe end a few careers while you're at it.
The whole blaming Christians thing... ya know, it's easy to just say it's all because of Christians, but we all know that's not really the case. But to you fellas getting upset at someone blaming all Christians or Christianity in general..
Look, I know that a majority of the country is Christian, but we don't see the normal everyday Christian guy just going about his life. No one finds that interesting. What people do find interesting is the Jack Thompsons, spouting hellfire and brimstone. The nutjobs. So, that's where this is all coming from.
Not that it's okay, mind you. For example, black people were/are shown in a negative light more often than not, specifically on the news, and on shows like Cops. (don't hate on cops too much though, I love that freaking show) It's not the sole reason for rascism, but it doesn't help. The same can be said with any group of people that can be put into a group, whether it be by age, skin color, religious belief. Media portrayal of gamers is much the same way.
I'd also like to point out that the only time I ever know that I'm talking to a Christian is when I'm talking to a nutjob Christian who is hassling me about my Fuck Censorship CBLDF shirt, my long hair, the music I'm listening to, etc.. Christians that are normal reasonable people tend not to tell me that I'm going to hell, or whip out bibles at me.
Anyway, I'm sure this was rambling, but I just wanted to put it out there.
Did Microsoft Flight Simulator inspire 9-11? You could make the argument...and as such Flight Simulator, FLIGHT SIMULATOR for crying out loud would be banned under this law.
"I know whats best for you, trust me."
that is what I'm getting from all these anti-video game activists these days, they THINK they have the children's best interests at heart but they dont.
You have no private right of action under the First Amendment. You cannot sue because a law is passed that you think violates your rights.
The video game industry could only sue if they were actually harmed. So if this law passed and a game was banned or say EA fined. THEN EA could sue, but they can't sue until the law is actually used against them.
If they try to sue earlier than that the case will be dismissed for lack of "ripeness." It's this idea that the courts will not issue "advisory opinions." They won't issue decisions on laws until those laws are actually employed against someone so that the legislature doesn't slam the courts with hypothetical laws just to see if they'll pass.
It would do two things:
1) Gum up the court system even more than it already is
2) Make the courts the lawmakers, not the legislatures, since no law would pass without first being run by the courts for an "o.k."
Sent my form letter in.
Surprised this passed the house.
Confused that an Arizona law was recently passed which allows adults to carry concealed weapons (with permit) onto school campuses.
You can carry an object invented with violence as its purpose onto a populated area, and if you fire that weapon, the media you have experienced can be blamed for your choice of action.
to think out tax dollars go into this non sence im glad in not there and I feel bad for people who have to deal with them ok for now on im voting so we can cut this shit out for good!!!1
The bill has to be passed and allowed by the governor of Arizona to become law. It may or may not become law. If there are any intelligent members of the legislature it won't.
Ok let's say it does become law. That still doesn't make it constitutional. The reason for the ESA's call to action is they'd RATHER not have to deal with a plethora of court cases defending themselves, however it's still not something to worry about. The bill is VERY VAGUE which in of itself will cause it to be unconstitutional based on state and federal statutes. It will be cut down like many of it's ilk (sp?).
This really comes down to a question of how much will the video game industry have to spend to defend itself from such dribble.
@ GP
LOVE the bible reference there! That really puts this in perspective for everyone.
Repeat after me:
Guns don't kill people, people do.
Video games don't kill people, people do.
Religion doesn't kill people, people do.
Books don't kill people, people do.
don't / doesn't kill people, people do.
If you're referring to religion as the Bible then I agree. If you use a blanket term as "religion" well then you're referring to a group of people and therefore have made a fallicy in your argument.
I agree with all of those, but for religion you're wrong unfortunately. Religion has killed many, and I'm NOT singling out ANY of them for that... Simply stating the facts.
I whole-heartedly agree with you. Saying games aren't the general problem and then going on to blame something else (guns, the bible, etc.) is hypocritical. I refuse to stoop to that level.
Amen
That lawsuit was justified. A reasonable person expects to get burned spilling coffee on themselves. A reasonable person does *NOT* expect third degree burns that require skin grafts, especially when McD's was warned over it before. She originally requested simply medical bills. The award phrased as "millions of dollars" does sound like a lot, doesn't it? That's not what it was though. It was "one day of revenue from coffee sales".
"Religion" is abstract. A religion is merely a group of teachings to be acted out on the will of its folowers. A religion cannot come to your house and kill you. Only a representative of a religion can. As such, religion doesn't kill people. People kill people.
@Meleedragon27 & Steve
You can tie this in to something else: saying that video gamers are unfairly stereotyped and then turning around and stereotyping somebody else (in my experience, "it's the South", or, more recently "it's Texas" is the typical fallback) is hypocritical.
This Bill has the saliva of a thousands trail lawyers all over it, drooling at the financial prospect that it entails.
So lets drop the the whole religion angle and get back to hating on the lawyers, surely we can all agree to that?
You know, some of those lawyers are on our side too!
Slow down speedy, I did not say all lawyers, just the ones behind this/ready to take advantage of it in the unlikely event that it becomes law.
This will die under scrutiny simply because it opens those who would pass it under too much scrutiny about legality and creating an excuse for baseless and frivilous litigation.
I'm disgusted that people would again try to blame a medium ( be it books, wow, dark ages again?, music, 1980's much?, movies, etc.), instead of the parents not acting as parents.
As far as teaching kids things, could pac - man be sued for teaching kids to eat white pellets, which morons might interpret as pills? I'm making it public here to my friends, family, fellow employees. This law is just another way for lobbying parents to act like they give a crap, but they're really just there so they have less work to do.
Nasty, nasty people who exemplify behavior almost as bad as those who they are fighting.
*writes on voter registration*
Pixelante (with an illustration of the sprite Donkey Kong from the 8-bit days)
'We are lawyers providing free legal representation and education for women, children, and senior victims of domestic violence, sexual assault or elder abuse in civil law suits [b]directly against the abusers. [/b]'
It appears that not only are they no longer going 'directly against the abusers', but they are simply looking for a way of making more money for themselves, since whilst they do not charge, I can betcha they take a percentage for administration.
The Heaven's Gate situation that came to pass in Rancho Santa Fe, California comes to mind as one example where religion did kill.
The fact is religion cannot exist without followers. To say that a religion cannot come to your house and kill you ok... But then replace religion with government...? Same argument. Would you still support that ideal?
Honestly, this sort of thing is why you will never see me be a diplomat or senator. Somebody tried to get me to vote for something like this, I'd probably laugh at his butt. (Just wreaks of someone trying to find a way to cash in on tragic acts.)
Arizona, I assume you will be starting with the bible and the koran...
also will you be suing the US government for giving people the first amendment so they could make all this filth...?
ANYONE THAT VOTED FOR THIS BILL SHOULD BE VOTED OUT OF OFFICE NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oddly enough, 'God told me to do it' seems to be a ticket to an instant insanity plea.....
There's one passage that is always used by gay-hater groups (I hate those kind of cliques). Find it for a cookie.
This bill is really ridiculous. It goes against all democracy is about, this is just bringing us in the books 1984 or Fahrenheit 451. Seriously, there's no chance that this bill will be accepted.
First off by saying that Arizona thinks that some books or games can be dangerous it now gives any criminal who wants to blame games/movies/books for their crime that much more credibility (and that much more incentive to do so).
Second certain insane people can be set off by ANYTHING. I remember a long time ago someone here posted a link to a woman who killed her children saying she was inspired by a spider which she took as a sign from God that she must kill her kids.
Thirdly what if the motivation wasn't intended by the makers? I read that the movie Fight Club inspired some real life fight clubs to join, which I don't think was the author's intention at all (again insane people can be set off by anything).
Fourthly punishing retailers adds a whole new level of absurdity. Are they supposed to perform background checks on those who buy games? Will the government supply them with the technology to do so?
Oh and finally the Bible could EASILY fall under this category. How many abortion clinic bombers said they were doing God's work?
No worries mate. Those poor guys get such a bad rap though! Guess I got a little worked up by the topic :p