NC Senator Failed at Legislating Content, Now Proposes a Tax Break for Developers

March 11, 2009 -

An interesting legislative turnabout is underway in North Carolina.

A state senator who twice in the past introduced bills designed to restrict the sales of mature-themed games to minors has now proposed that the state offer financial incentives to game developers.

Yesterday, Sen. Julia Boseman (D) introduced S525, a new bill that would permit game developers to take advantage of a tax credit of up to 15% for qualifying expenses.

While the measure does not restrict M-rated games as did an earlier proposal in Oklahoma, it does preclude material which qualifies as "obscene" under North Carolina law:

Limitation. – No credit is allowed under this section for qualifying expenses with respect to digital interactive media that contain material that is obscene, as defined in G.S. 14-190.1.

In past sessions, Sen. Boseman introduced bills designed to restrict sales of mature games to minors in 2005 and 2007. Both measures failed to pass.


Comments

Re: NC Senator Failed at Legislating Content, Now Proposes a

I don't believe her stance here is inherently hypocritical. The view that violent video games shouldn't be sold to minors isn't incompatible with generally encouraging game development within your state. Even E-rated games are damn good for your economy.

www.gameslaw.net

Re: NC Senator Failed at Legislating Content, Now Proposes ...

I remember that after I commented yesterday about politicians abondoning their stated principles due to the bad economy, somebody, after calling me a troll, asked me what I based my assertion on. I was pissed, so I didn't answer them then. I would just like to say now, case in fucking point.

---------------------------------

Internet troll > internet paladin

-------------------------------------------------------- Believe in something! Even if it's wrong, believe in it! GET OFF MY PHONE! -Glenn Beck

Re: NC Senator Failed at Legislating Content, Now Proposes ...

Considering obsene material is already (by definition) illegal, what is the point of exluding it?  That is a bit like saying 'we will give tax breaks to photography studios as long as they don't make kiddy porn' or 'we will give tax breaks to horror movie production as long as actors are not actually murdered for the film'.

Re: NC Senator Failed at Legislating Content, Now Proposes ...

It makes sense to add the exclusion. It may be illegal to sell the content, but if they do not specify that producers of said content are inelligible from the beginning, they cannot legally deny incentives to producers of such content.

E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma

Re: NC Senator Failed at Legislating Content, Now Proposes ...

So wait, they're allowed to produce it but not allowed to sell it? o_o

Re: NC Senator Failed at Legislating Content, Now Proposes ...

Most states have laws regulating the production of obscene material. I just felt that it is necessary to include those provisions.

In Oklahoma the movie tax incentives apply for all movie productions except for those that fall under illegal or obscene standards as defined by law.

It makes sense to not want to be seen as supporting illegal activity in any way.

E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma

Re: NC Senator Failed at Legislating Content, Now Proposes ...

So, could one still qualify for a tax break if one produced legal pornography?

Re: NC Senator Failed at Legislating Content, Now Proposes ...

It depends on your definition of "pornography". Nudie pics aren't legally obscene, but they could be seen as pornographic....
Speaking to the rest of these comments, obscenity is not in and of itself illegal--although it may be regulated. A state may never prohibit ownership of obscene material by adults (with exceptions like child porn), but it may drastically limit production, distribution, etc.

www.gameslaw.net

Re: NC Senator Failed at Legislating Content, Now Proposes ...

AS long as it is not considered obscene under the states obscenity laws and meets all other requirements, yes.

E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma

Re: NC Senator Failed at Legislating Content, Now Proposes ...

Ah, that answers my question, "what is obscene?" The illegal stuff, okay. What a silly addition.

Re: NC Senator Failed at Legislating Content, Now Proposes ...

Inconsistant is right. Question is: Would you call it hypocrisy, or repentence?

Re: NC Senator Failed at Legislating Content, Now Proposes a

Actually, her prior legislations didn't "fail".  They were just never given the unneccesary time to be looked over and she knew there were more important things on the agenda, so they were never pushed for.

Also, remember that a certain someone claimed to have drafted at least the first version of those prior bills.  And, who knows, maybe they did the second but seeing such bills fail, didn't want to own up to it.

Also, the restrictions on this new bill seems out of place with her stance on similar incentives for the movie industry in NC.  Another senator opposed tax incentives for development of movies that contained certain content and Senator Boseman opposed those restrictions.  Yet, here, she supports them.  I emailed her some time back asking her about the interview in which she opposed restrictions to the movie industry incentives, but hadn't heard back.  Perhaps this is why. 

Her inconsistant stance is rather mind numbing.

Nightwng2000

NW2K Software

Nightwng2000 has also updated his MySpace page: http://www.myspace.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

Nightwng2000 NW2K Software http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will an M rating hurt Batman: Arkham Knight's sales?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Andrew EisenBullying resulting from criticizing fiction is not the critic's fault. Fiction is not always unrealistic. Neither begets sexual objectification.02/27/2015 - 11:56am
Andrew EisenSubjective? Sure, but that doesn't matter because no one's trying to regulate sexual objectification. Plenty of room to criticize sexual objectification in multiple forms of media (like Sarkeesian already does). 02/27/2015 - 11:56am
ConsterDon't 'beauty rags' already get plenty of criticism?02/27/2015 - 9:02am
ZippyDSMleeEh still rather subjective… the haters would be better off going after teen and beauty rags and magazines than fiction, fiction follows reality and going after fiction tends to turn into a bullying fest’s… plus its fiction its unrealistic to start with….02/27/2015 - 1:10am
MechaTama31That's a pretty difficult anatomy to break.02/26/2015 - 11:09pm
MechaTama31"the way her animations repeatedly break her anatomy" <-- I'm sorry, but we are talking here about the woman who can roll up into a little ball and live to tell the tale, yes? ;)02/26/2015 - 11:09pm
Andrew EisenAs far as examples that could be culled from female game characters though, that one's pretty mild.02/26/2015 - 9:11pm
Andrew EisenNot as much the heels or the suit in and of themselves but certainly the way her animations repeatedly break her anatomy to show off her lady bits.02/26/2015 - 9:10pm
E. Zachary KnightWell, Samus's heels are certainly impracticable, but I wouldn't really call her Zero suit objectified. I don't really feel that the new Lara Croft is objectified either, but that is my subjective opinion.02/26/2015 - 9:08pm
Andrew EisenTomb Raider: No but we haven't seen much of anything yet. Samus: Yes.02/26/2015 - 9:07pm
ZippyDSMleeWould you call the new tomb raider objectified? WOuld Samus Aran from the new Smash bros be objectified?02/26/2015 - 9:02pm
WonderkarpI'm hoping they put the rest of the comic book ghostbusters in there. Ortiz and Rookie(From GB the game)02/26/2015 - 8:38pm
Wonderkarpghostbusters board game is doing great. getting close too a 3rd extra playable Character. Ron Alexander.02/26/2015 - 8:37pm
Andrew EisenSmurfette is not subjective. If there's more than one female character, it's not Smurfette. Anyway, as with everything on the list, Smurfette is, in and of itself, not necessarily a bad thing.02/26/2015 - 8:32pm
Andrew EisenI think there's 5 women (out of 15, I think) but other than one being a bit more "hippy" than the others, they pretty much all have the same body type. Especially when compaired to the huge variety of male body types.02/26/2015 - 8:31pm
Wonderkarpso I dont see Smurfette as a bad thing. Unless like all your female characters are Smurfette. remember the Smurfs also had Sassette02/26/2015 - 8:29pm
E. Zachary KnightOne good example of the larger issues is one Anita used in the presentation, Blizzard's Overwatch game. There are a dozen men in the game with a dozen body types. But there are only 4 women with 2 body types, but 3 of them have the same one.02/26/2015 - 8:28pm
Wonderkarpthe smurfette thing is subjective to how many female characters you have. Take Sonic for example. You have Amy, who is obvious smurfette, but there's several other female characters now without that. Including the original animated seriescomics with Sally02/26/2015 - 8:28pm
E. Zachary KnightAE. Very true. I think that is where I was going, but it didn't come out right. Jack Harkness is sexy but not objectified. Whereas, a women would have to be objectified in order to be "sexy" in most games.02/26/2015 - 8:26pm
E. Zachary KnightAnd as Andrew pointed out, there is a big difference between a sexualized man, and an idealized man. But for some reason, there is no distinction between women in games. For the most part.02/26/2015 - 8:25pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician