Supreme Court Amicus Brief Filed by Sen. Yee & Psych Associations

As GamePolitics indicated yesterday, an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief has been filed in support of California’s petition requesting that the U.S. Supreme Court review the constitutionality of the state’s 2005 violent video game law. To date, two lower federal courts have deemed the measure unconstitutional.

The brief was filed today on behalf of State Sen. Leland Yee (D), the sponsor of the contested statute as well as the California Psychiatric and California Psychological Associations. Yee himself is a child psychologist by profession. He also notes in the brief that he has authored several bills protecting free speech rights in circumstances other than violent games.

In seeking to explain to the Supreme Court why it should approve California’s petition for a full hearing, the 15-page document maintains that the state has a compelling interest in restricting children’s access to such games. The oft-heard argument about the interactivity of video games is among the theories put forth:

The interactive nature of video games is vastly different than passively listening to music, watching a movie, or reading a book. With interactive video games, the child becomes a part of the action which serves as a potent agent to facilitate violence and over time learns the destructive behavior.

 

This immersion results in a more powerful experience and potentially dangerous learned behavior in children and youth…

The brief also suggests that video games present a new type of challenge for parents in their efforts to monitor their children’s media diet:

Parents can read a book, watch a movie or listen to a CD to discern if it is appropriate for their child. These violent video games, on the other hand, can contain up to 800 hours of footage with the most atrocious content often reserved for the highest levels and can be accessed only by advanced players after hours upon hours of progressive mastery.

And, while federal courts have not to date been swayed by research suggesting that violent video games lead to real-world violence, the brief points to such studies in support of its position:

Just as the technology of video games improves at astonishing rates, so to does the body of research consistently demonstrate the harmful effects these violent interactive games have on minors. Over three thousand peer-reviewed studies, produced over a period of 30 years documenting the effects of screen violence (including violent video games), have now been published…

 

These data suggest very strongly that participating in the playing of violent video games by children and youth increase aggressive thought and behavior; increase antisocial behavior and delinquency; engender poor school performance; desensitize the game player to violence…

Surprisingly, GamePolitics comes in for a mention in the brief. GP’s Legislation Tracker feature is referenced as a means of pointing out the wide variety of legislation aimed at video games around the United States.

Sen. Yee’s office has issued a press release on the filing of the amicus brief, including a link to the brief (15-page PDF). The Supreme Court is expected to consider California’s petition in the fall.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone

96 comments

  1. 0
    PHX Corp says:

    I think this could be the end for the California video game law

    Watching JT on GP is just like watching an episode of Jerry springer only as funny as the fights

  2. 0
    BearDogg-X says:

    After all his bluster over "filing" an amicus brief, it turns out that Yee never actually filed an amicus brief. Instead, according to the docket, Yee filed a motion seeking permission to file the amicus brief:

    http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08-1448.htm

    There’s a huge difference between filing and seeking permission to file, and further proves that Yee is a liar and an incompetent.

     

    Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Hornets, Jack Thompson can geaux chase a chupacabra.


    Proud supporter of the New Orleans Saints, LSU, 1st Amendment; Real American; Hound of Justice; Even through the darkest days, this fire burns always

    Saints(3-4), LSU(7-0)

  3. 0
    MasterAssassin says:

    You know what’s really funny is CA is so bankrupt that they are having to release prisoners from jail yet they still have money to defend this POS legislation. Oh and it might be worth mentioning that Yee voted against banning lead a poisonous substance from children’s toys. Yeah he really cares about the kids rofl epic fail.

  4. 0
    Bennett Beeny says:

    I understand where you’re coming from on this, and I agree with your general attitude towards the issue, BUT no symbol, rating or ratings board can tell any parent what is suitable for their child.  Ratings are SUGGESTIONS, not rules, and in the end it’s ALWAYS the parents who are responsible for figuring out what’s suitable for their child.  Sometimes the ESRB rating is not strict enough, and sometimes it’s way too strict.  That’s why the ESRB itself recognises that their ratings are only a general guide to content and that the parents are the ultimate authority.

  5. 0
    TBoneTony says:

    You know…. people like Yee will always tell lies, even outrageous lies like he has just done.

    800 hours??? (150 hours I might understand but 800????)

    Videogames using violence to sell to kids? (Manhunt 2 and BMX XXX were games that never sold well) Also we have games on every console selling well regardless of violence or not. There are violent games that sell well as well as non-voilent games selling well. Ever wonder why Mario has lasted for almost 30 years??? Wii Sports and other Sport type of games have been some of the most popular videogames even from those who are not core gamers.

    Yee talks the talk, but he can never walk the walk. Ask him if he has ever played a Videogame, and ask him if he has looked at the bottom left hand corner of the box for the all important parental information and he will be lost in what you are talking about.

    Or he might know but he has never bothered to tell the parents that there is a symbol on the box of EVERY Videogame sold in America that lets parents know if this game is suitable for their child under 17.

    Look, even when Yee went on condeming Night Trap for all the ‘sex’ that it did not have in the game…you know that this is what a politician like him has been doing for all too long.

    Caliafornia, you deserve better than this pile of waste of tax payers money.

     

     

     

  6. 0
    BearDogg-X says:

    Makes every Simpsons fan wish she’d die like Ned Flanders’ wife did.

    Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Hornets, Jack Thompson can geaux chase a chupacabra.


    Proud supporter of the New Orleans Saints, LSU, 1st Amendment; Real American; Hound of Justice; Even through the darkest days, this fire burns always

    Saints(3-4), LSU(7-0)

  7. 0
    nightwng2000 says:

    Also note that he is condensing those studies to "screen violence".  Not just video game violence.  Though he previously stated that video games are unique and should be treated seperately.

    This is like arguing against gay marriage and claiming that "the majority of the nation is christian and opposes gay marriage", failing to mention that Christianity is made up of a large number of subcatagories, and each of those subcatagories has their own subcatagories, and each and every subjcatagory has their own beliefs which actually contradict one another and don’t share the same belief on the issue.  It’s like hijacking someone’s vote.  "They’re Christian, I’m Christian, so they MUST agree with me because we’re both Christian."

    Video games are different than other forms of media because they are interactive but we’ll use studies on "screen violence" and who will notice we just hijacked results from forms of media that we just claimed are different.

    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

  8. 0
    Adamas Draconis says:

    Agreed we are talking about Terabytes at this point and the biggest external harddrive i’ve seen is what? like 2 Tb?

     

    Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.

  9. 0
    PHX Corp says:

    The Amicus curaie of yee’s is like watching a slow train wreck waiting to happen

    Watching JT on GP is just like watching an episode of Jerry springer only as funny as the fights

  10. 0
    GoodRobotUs says:

    So the two amicus briefs filed on behalf of California have both been…

    ‘For God’s sake, won’t somebody think of the Children!’

    There’s a part of me that recoils in horror at the thought that most politicians attitude towards the general public is that of Ned Flanders’ wife…

  11. 0
    BearDogg-X says:

    Another lie was the "3,000 studies over 30 years" crap, while actively ignoring studies that proves the opposite of what he’s saying.

    Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Hornets, Jack Thompson can geaux chase a chupacabra.


    Proud supporter of the New Orleans Saints, LSU, 1st Amendment; Real American; Hound of Justice; Even through the darkest days, this fire burns always

    Saints(3-4), LSU(7-0)

  12. 0
    JustChris says:

    The only people that would have thousands of hours of video footage (remember 800 is just for ONE GAME) are professional broadcasting companies, and a few movie pirates that have lots of "booty" stored in their "pirate ships", usually more PC cases to contain the hard drives.

    GameSnooper

  13. 0
    PHX Corp says:

    Is it just me or the EMA and ESA are taking longer

    The response of EMA and the Entertainment Software Association, our co-plaintiff in the case, to the state’s request is due July 22.

    The Court will likely announce in the early fall whether it will take the case.

     

    Watching JT on GP is just like watching an episode of Jerry springer only as funny as the fights

  14. 0
    nighstalker160 says:

    "The interactive nature of video games is vastly different than passively listening to music, watching a movie, or reading a book. With interactive video games, the child becomes a part of the action which serves as a potent agent to facilitate violence and over time learns the destructive behaviour."

    [CITATION NEEDED]

     

     

  15. 0
    Buckeye531 says:

    Some of us here have mentioned perjury (including myself) in response to Yee’s brief, but let’s forget the legalities for a bit. Perjury may not be as black and white as we are making it out to be, but morals and ethics definately are.

    Even if Yee and the psychologists do not get charged, or they do get charged and then acquitted, from moral and ethical standpoints they have lied. They may or may not suffer the criminal aspects of lying, but they sure as hell will suffer the moral consequences and hopefully the civil penalties.

    This hypocrisy is beyond sickening. Senator Yee, while concerned with the morals of the children of his district and the nation, is obviously not practicing morals himself. Although I can not blame him for being concerned for the moral fiber of children, I definately fault him for the tactics he is willing to stoop to and he is doing this while trying to strip, whether it be in the long term or the short term, the most base of this nation’s most basic right from the video game industry. The right to free, unabridged speech. We all expect more out of our elected officials. The same goes for the psychologists who sided with him in the brief.

    Who the hell are politicians to fault the video game industry for shootings, sexual assaults, and other crimes when they can not live up to their own morals, ethics, and laws? What in the hell gives any lying, cheating, or any morally (or even legally) bankrupt politician the moral right to legislate morality? I do not care what any study says, how credible it is, how down the middle the scientists conducting the study are, politicians who have no moral, ethical, or legal values have ABSOLUTELY NO RIGHT to fault anyone or anything for this nation’s problems. They have ABSOLUTELY NO RIGHT to legislate against the constitutional freedoms of anyone and anything.

    The concerns of the moral integrity of the children of Senator Yee and the psychologists who filed the brief may be just, but their tactics and ethics are not. Their lies in this brief expose them as hypocrits. They have no moral right to target the industry period. They have no moral right to fault anyone else for this nation’s problems with violent children.

    Will Yee and the psychologists face perjury charges? Maybe, only time will tell. Will Yee and the psychologists face the moral and ethical consequences for lying? Yes, they all will.

  16. 0
    Avalongod says:

    What makes you say that Yee is screwing up the chances for this bill being reviewed.  I doubt that SCotUS has any idea that these folks are slinging BS, particularly if no one steps up and challenges them.

    Don’t get me wrong, I hope you’re right, but I’d argue disinformation is oftentimes quite effective in influening policy.

  17. 0
    Arcanagos says:

    I dont even think most HARD DRIVES could fit that much content

    "Go ahead and hate your neighbor, go ahead and cheat a friend. Do it in the name of Heaven, Jack Thompson’ll justify it in the end." – nightwng2000

  18. 0
    Arcanagos says:

    Lol, I wouldnt be at all surprised if that were true, it’d go a long way towards explaining this heap of trash anyway

    "Go ahead and hate your neighbor, go ahead and cheat a friend. Do it in the name of Heaven, Jack Thompson’ll justify it in the end." – nightwng2000

  19. 0
    Balance says:

    "He also notes in the brief that he has authored several bills protecting free speech rights in circumstances other than violent games."

    So, in addition to being wasteful, intellectually dishonest, and politically opportunistic, he’s also hypocritical. Way to go, Yee.

  20. 0
    BearDogg-X says:

    Good question. Whatever it is, it ain’t enough.

    Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Hornets, Jack Thompson can geaux chase a chupacabra.


    Proud supporter of the New Orleans Saints, LSU, 1st Amendment; Real American; Hound of Justice; Even through the darkest days, this fire burns always

    Saints(3-4), LSU(7-0)

  21. 0
    HilaryDuffGta says:

    *slams head on desk* how the F*** are you too lazy to even read the rating on the box….here is the perfect solution…..

     

     

     

    annoying brat-Mommy i want this grand theft auto game

     

    stupid parent-*puts the game away* no i dont feel like bothering with it or making sure its a appropriate game for you we are leaving…

     

     

    Wow Look at that Problem Solved

  22. 0
    gamegod25 says:

    I have only one thing to say to Mr. Yee and his assosiates…*ahem* BULLSHIT!!!

    Take your ignorance and prejudice to yourselves. We’re all sick of your blatent scaremongering to get attention. You have no real scientific proof, your lame and tired excuses are the oldest ones in the book, and you have no case. Do the world a favor, the next time you have a thought…let it go.

  23. 0
    nightwng2000 says:

    He also lied by making the statments about a Parent being able to read the books they want or don’t want their children to read, music they want or don’t want their children to listen to, and watch movies they want or don’t want their children to watch.

    Remember, it was Yee’s contention that Parents were "too harried" to even read a rating letter on a box, content descriptors on a box, or read the back of the box of a video game, let alone do any more thorough research with the multitude of resources out there on video games.

    If they are too harried to do even that, then they are too harried to read a book from cover to cover, listen to a CD of multiple songs, or watch a movie from beginning to end (which, on the average, takes 1.5 hours or even more).

    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

  24. 0
    BearDogg-X says:

    All together now………

    "What you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.”

    Leland Yee also perjured himself in his piece of garbage amicus brief with "800 hours of footage", "increasing violence the further into the game", and citing statistics that are contrary to the FTC’s own research.

    If the parents can read a children’s book, watch a movie, or listen to a music CD to see if it’s appropriate for their child, there’s nothing stopping them from playing the video game, regardless of how long the game is.

    Can’t wait to see the look on the piece of trash’s face when SCOTUS refuses to even hear California’s appeal.

    Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Hornets, Jack Thompson can geaux chase a chupacabra.


    Proud supporter of the New Orleans Saints, LSU, 1st Amendment; Real American; Hound of Justice; Even through the darkest days, this fire burns always

    Saints(3-4), LSU(7-0)

  25. 0
    jedidethfreak says:

    Let’s just hope that the Supreme Court actually does what it is supposed to do and interprets the law, instead of deciding that they have to change the law to think of the children.

    Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone’s feelings.

  26. 0
    Lou says:

    Ah yee your stupidity can only be surpassed by your lies and the sheer obscession of getting this stupid law overturned by the supreme court. And yet your state is now cutting billions of dollars on higher-ed programs, releasing dangerous criminals early, cutting healthcare for children and the elderly. And they have the testicular fortitute to take their failed law to the supreme court??? WAKE UP CALIFORNIA LAWMAKERS you are wasting money for something that will not advance your state in any way shape or form. This is extreme politics at it’s best. No wonder some of my Cali friends call it "The bear flag banana republic"

  27. 0
    PHX Corp says:

    Think that’s bad, look at the eagle forum’s brief which is a combination of california’s petition, yee amicus brief all dumped into a vat of steroids

    Watching JT on GP is just like watching an episode of Jerry springer only as funny as the fights

  28. 0
    PHX Corp says:

    this most recent opinion, coupled with the eagle forum’s opinion just made this not worth the Courts time

    Watching JT on GP is just like watching an episode of Jerry springer only as funny as the fights

  29. 0
    hellfire7885 says:

    "But really, all his claims are so vague it’s hard to tell exactly what he means."

     

    That very well may be the entire point.

     

    Make vague claims, and pray that the judges take his word on it and don’t demand proof, and that the images they get i ntheir heads horrify them enough to get them to rule in his favor.


  30. 0
    hellfire7885 says:

    "What game is he playing?"

    Easy answer. None.

    Only someone who has never done any research on the industry or media at all can coem up with that figure.


  31. 0
    Wormdundee says:

    Parents can read a book, watch a movie or listen to a CD to discern if it is appropriate for their child. These violent video games, on the other hand, can contain up to 800 hours of footage with the most atrocious content often reserved for the highest levels and can be accessed only by advanced players after hours upon hours of progressive mastery

    This is one of the wackiest paragraphs I have ever read. The first sentence is alright, makes sense, but then he goes into crazy land. 800 hours of footage is incomprehensible. I’m not even really sure what he means by ‘footage’. If he’s talking about non-interactive cut scenes/movie clips, then he’s insane, because the longest amount in a video game is far below 100 hours (the Xenosaga games I’m guessing). If he’s talking about actual playtime, then it gets impossible to tell what this could mean. I mean sure, I can leave a game turned on for 1000 hours, that doesn’t mean it has 1000 hours of ‘footage’, since I can just as easily leave a DVD paused for 1000 hours. If he’s talking about actual active playtime, then he’s just plain wrong. The only thing like that is games that don’t have an end. TF2, L4D, and every MMO I guess (but these games don’t have changing content for the most part).

    Then there’s this whole concept of games getting more violent as you progress. What the shit? I have NEVER heard of a game that does this. I suppose you could consider it as you get access to more powerful weaponry later in the game? But really, all his claims are so vague it’s hard to tell exactly what he means.

  32. 0
    NinjaJustice says:

    Terrible brief.  It barely even discusses the "law," just babbles on with a largely irrelevant think-of-the-children argument.

    And I’m sick of restrictions on videogames being compared to restrictions on alcohol, tobacco, and firearms.  They’re not restrictions on speech.  From a constitutional perspective, they’re not in the same league.  Hell, they’re not even playing the same sport.  And most importantly, they’re not subject to strict scrutiny.

     

  33. 0
    GoodRobotUs says:

    Me either to be honest, at least not beyond the level that, for example, in Chess, a Knight is a more dangerous enemy than a Pawn. More challenging, certainly, but not more violent.

  34. 0
    Arcanagos says:

    Here’s an idea, how about getting this guy pushed out of office for libel and slander? There are so many outright lies in his statement it’s ridiculous.

    These violent video games, on the other hand, can contain up to 800 hours of footage with the most atrocious content often reserved for the highest levels and can be accessed only by advanced players after hours upon hours of progressive mastery.

    800 Hours of footage? Not even Oblivion, Morrowind, and Fallout 3 combined had that much content, and they’re widely considered some of the biggest (content-wise) games around. What game is he playing?

    Just as the technology of video games improves at astonishing rates, so to does the body of research consistently demonstrate the harmful effects these violent interactive games have on minors. Over three thousand peer-reviewed studies, produced over a period of 30 years documenting the effects of screen violence (including violent video games), have now been published…

    Why is it that these people cite dozens of studies on this, but they never show a single source?

    Parents can read a book, watch a movie or listen to a CD to discern if it is appropriate for their child.

    This guy has obviously never seen the front of a video game box before… See that big black "M" on the front of the box Mr Yee?  That’s a parent’s first clue that the game is FOR ADULTS.

    These data suggest very strongly that participating in the playing of violent video games by children and youth increase aggressive thought and behavior; increase antisocial behavior and delinquency; engender poor school performance; desensitize the game player to violence…

    Source please…  Oh wait, you dont have one do you?  That’s right, it can’t possibly be rising poverty, drug problems, and parents that dont give a crap about their kids.  It has to be those conflabbed evil game-tape players! BAN THEM!

    This kind of thing ticks me off so much…

    "Go ahead and hate your neighbor, go ahead and cheat a friend. Do it in the name of Heaven, Jack Thompson’ll justify it in the end." – nightwng2000

  35. 0
    Arell says:

    So, when is the ESA going to file thier brief screaming "Bullshit!" at all these false claims?  Because anyone can file a brief.  I think if you went through the right paperwork and red tape, even an average jane reading this website could file a brief with the Court.  That’s not saying they’ll read it, but they will read the most prominent ones.

    I almost wish the the Supreme Court does hear the case.  Let’s not forget, all this current noise is about just getting the Court to accept the case.  They get thousands of cases a year, and only judge over about 100.  Yes, it would be a gamble, but the payoff would be great.  If the Supreme Court itself told Yee to fuck off, then that would pretty much squash any other politicians’ hopes of using the gaming industry as a scapegoat to earn more sympathy votes with Family organizations.  Now, it is true that the Court has gone against lower court precidence in the past, but it was usually for something major like Civil Liberties for black people and that sort of thing.  I doubt the Supreme Court would counter what the lower courts have said when it comes to something as socially minor as video games.

  36. 0
    GoodRobotUs says:

    Well, thing is, this is the Court of Appeal for the Court of Appeal, if you want them to listen to your case, you better have a darn good reason for why you think the previous two courts you went through were wrong in their judgement.

    This document doesn’t even attempt to touch on that, what the Supremes want to hear is why they should hear your case when it’s already been judged twice, not a simple regurgitation of arguments that were already thrown out by those previous courts.

    This is just an over-emotional, wishy-washy whinge with zero legal substance, based on hearsay, and not covering a single point as to why, when two courts have not accepted these arguments, the Supreme Court should even consider listening to them again.

     

    Though it actually pains me to say it, because, for all Yee’s faults, he doesn’t actively despise people who enjoy more violent Video Games, but it reads more than a little bit like a Jack Thompson pleading.

  37. 0
    JDKJ says:

    I’ve seen Mick Jagger being quoted as saying that he "mumbled" it. Not that’s there’s much practical difference between "changed" and "mumbled." 

  38. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    To be fair, I’ve put in at least 1000 hours into L4D.  That game is fucking fantastic.  However, I don’t find the violence ever really changes; i’m shooting the same zombies with the same equipment.  It’s not like after playing online for 900 hours, I get a magical chainsaw or something.

  39. 0
    starsrift says:

    Didn’t Arcanum or a similar game released around that time average out 120 hours of play? Something like that.

    Anyway, the 800 hours is a lie, when considering conventional gaming. Even WoW addicts have to struggle for a while to clock in that much – and it’s not 800 hours of play, it’s more like a few hundred, but lots of the same play. In any case, the whole thing is a baseless argument – this is why we have the ESRB, we -don’t- expect parents to play through the entire game first.

    On the other hand, I have few qualms with games being subjected to a similar array of laws to those that movies are.

  40. 0
    Ryno says:

    I’m pretty sure the Stones changed the lyrics. If I’m not mistaken it’s been a blot on their history ever since.

     

    Saying that Jack Thompson is impotent is an insult to impotent men everywhere. They’ve got a whole assortment of drugs that can cure their condition; Jack, however…

  41. 0
    JustChris says:

    When he is referring to games having 800 hours of footage (or maybe he means gameplay) he sounds mistaken in the depth involved in playing a game. All video games have near infinite decision paths, and thereby probably presumes you have to look into as many as possible. Maybe he’s thinking "hey game tester, for each time you play through this game, do something slightly different, and bam! we have 800 hours of play in no time". But that reasoning doesn’t apply to scanning a game for content.

    Saying that most games have "the most atrocious content often reserved for the highest levels" shows his ignorance on why people follow through in a game in the first place. Any game using violence as progress would probably have you doing most of what that violence has to offer in the first hour. 

    In a good action game, violence is the first allure, but it quickly steps aside to let a developing story or engaging atmosphere take hold for the rest of the experience. Games that sell on shock value alone usually never sell well (see manhunt 2 or BMX XXX).

    I also believe that both sides need to be heard, especially when Yee is being like a carpenter telling  electricians how to do their jobs. Have peers that are actually in the core gamer demographic doing some of the reviews. Or use unbiased research groups that are not forced to fill an "agenda quota" for any party.

    And when he says that the games "engender poor school performance" that’s another way of saying "video games have replaced school as an incentive to do various tasks". In that case, schools have to just try harder because children are just raised in environments different from a generation ago. Teachers should see it as a new challenge to adapt to. And if teachers don’t like facing new challenges around the corner, well, go flip some burgers at McDonald’s. Things will rarely change there an you’ll rarely get to do anything new.

    GameSnooper

  42. 0
    JDKJ says:

    But Ed Sullivan was notorious for imposing his peculiar brand of censorship on the acts appearing on his show. He told the Rolling Stones that the lyric "let’s spend the night together" was objectionable and also told the Doors that "girl, we couldn’t get much higher" was similarly objectionable.

  43. 0
    GoodRobotUs says:

    Edit: Misread it first time…

    Yup, it was that, Ed Sullivan only signed Elvis after his rival doubled his viewer figures by including him.

  44. 0
    Nekowolf says:

    I actually took a class at Delta College, "History of Rock and Roll" and some of the stuff against Elvis was mentioned. I want to say, it was either Ed Sullivan or the Milton Berle Show; he was doing a performance with his usual dance, but the camera stayed above his waist at all times.

    Note: I think it was Milton Berle. If I recall, Ed Sullivan did not like Elvis at all, and didn’t have him on until he was already quite famous.

  45. 0
    Bennett Beeny says:

    Some books are interactive on an even deeper level.  Take John Antal’s book ‘Armor Attacks’.  In this book, you take on the character of a tank platoon commander and take the decisions that get you to one of the book’s multiple endings.  What happens is up to you.  Great book by the way.

    My point is that books can be interactive in the same way games are.  But no one is calling for books to have ratings or limits on sale.  Why?  Because books are hundreds of years old while video games are only a couple of decades old.  Irrational fear of the former died out hundreds of years ago, but the witch hunt for the latter is still going strong.

  46. 0
    arowe87 says:

    The idea that books have less of an affect on children because they aren’t interactive is false. They are interactive, just not in the same way as games. They are active in an even more dangerous way. Mentally. When reading a book you create the characters with whatever details are given and fill in the rest. Each person will have a different idea of what a character looks like, sounds like, and acts like. Each person will create different details for scenarios played out in a book. This is interaction and some people will make a book darker than intended while others will make it more light-hearted. Couldn’t a child’s imagination make the book harmful to them. Some people will even look deeper into the story and see if there are hidden meanings and messages. Couldn’t these hidden messages be harmful to children, and some parents aren’t smart enough to find these hidden meanings, which makes it impossible to protect their children from the meanings.

    The whole idea that games are dangerous because you are physically interacting with them is misleading at best. All art forms require some sort of interaction between the art and the viewer, whether it is physical or mental.

    Parents can read a book, watch a movie or listen to a CD to discern if it is appropriate for their child. These violent video games, on the other hand, can contain up to 800 hours of footage with the most atrocious content often reserved for the highest levels and can be accessed only by advanced players after hours upon hours of progressive mastery.

    Or you could read the content descriptor on the back of the box that describes why a game is rated the way it is. Or Google™ the game title looking for information. Even the ESRB’s website has resources for parents to help make decisions about games. Quit trying to get the government to make decisions for you on how to raise your kids.

  47. 0
    Adamas Draconis says:

    nah, Bluff check, or in my D&D group: Roll a bullshit check. "1" The Honorable Court beats you over the head with tha Gavel of Law. YEA HAVE FAILED!

    Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.

  48. 0
    jedidethfreak says:

    I don’t think he was harried, as there was nobody flanking him in opposition with which to make him harried.  I think he just rolled a one on his Int check.

    Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone’s feelings.

  49. 0
    jedidethfreak says:

    Either way, he’s an idiot.

    Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone’s feelings.

  50. 0
    Zero Beat says:

    And lying to the court under oath is perjury, so if Amicus briefs count as sworn statements (it’s been a while since I had that basic law course), this could be a criminal offense.

     

    "That’s not ironic. That’s justice."

  51. 0
    GoodRobotUs says:

    I suppose, in their defence, it’s like squaring off with someone for a fist-fight, and they suddenly rip off their clothes and start dancing the twist. It’s kind of hard to prepare for someone doing something that involves no basis in fact or common sense. You can’t really pre-empt Yee lying about those figures,so there was no point filing an amicus brief in preperation for it.

    This, quite possibly, explains why Yee waited till the last moment to file.

  52. 0
    JDKJ says:

    My philosophy has always been that while wearing both a belt and a pair of suspenders at the same time is, I’m told, a fashion faux pas, on those occassions where I’m decidely interested in not being seen with my pants fallen around my ankles, I do so, anyway.

     

  53. 0
    NinjaJustice says:

    I don’t disagree in principle. But given that (1) none of the amicus briefs filed actually make a cogent legal argument and (2) the ample caselaw from the circuit courts already benchslaps the studies, I think filing responsive briefs is unecessary. Personally, I’d rather see the money saved towards a few more billable hours on a merits brief.

  54. 0
    JDKJ says:

    Why not? If the Petition for Certiorari is denied, then the merits of the case are thereby rendered moot. They’ll never be heard. That’s called "heading them off at the pass" in the legal profession. Why wouldn’t it be prudent to ensure to the fullest extent possible that Petitioner is headed off at the pass? And just because I’m confident that I can single-handedly whup your ass doesn’t mean that I shouldn’t have a buddy or two covering my back just in case the tide of the battle suddenly turns against me. Or should I leave myself open to the possibility, no matter how remote, that I’ve miscalculated my ability to whup your ass and then end up the one with the whupped ass? 

  55. 0
    NinjaJustice says:

    They don’t really need to be challenged at this point.  The amici briefs are in support of granting cert–that is, whether the Court will hear the case, not briefs on the merits.  And in light of the unanimous nature of the existing caselaw on the subject, it’s already an uphill battle for CA to get cert grantd in the first place.

  56. 0
    Arcanagos says:

    "Misstatement" is not harsh enough, it’s an outright lie is what it is

    "Go ahead and hate your neighbor, go ahead and cheat a friend. Do it in the name of Heaven, Jack Thompson’ll justify it in the end." – nightwng2000

  57. 0
    Ryno says:

    I think BGII had over 100, but that may have been with the expansion pack.

     

    Saying that Jack Thompson is impotent is an insult to impotent men everywhere. They’ve got a whole assortment of drugs that can cure their condition; Jack, however…

  58. 0
    jedidethfreak says:

    But none of the popular MMO’s even have M-rated gameplay.  The only reason they would have anything atrocious is because of the people who speak on it, which is also why they include player-activated chat filters.

    Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone’s feelings.

  59. 0
    beemoh says:

    I think the important comment there is "up to"- until somebody makes a game with over 800 hours of content, he’s not incorrect.

    Unless you consider taping the analogue stick that controls the camera down so it rotates round and round for 33 weeks "footage". 😀

    /b

  60. 0
    jedidethfreak says:

    Seriously, I’ve never heard of a game with more than sixty hours of gameplay.  Where the fuck did this guy pull out 800?  Do the math.  If you played a game with 800 hours of gameplay straight through without sleeping, eating, using the bathroom or going to school or work, it would still take you 33 days and eight hours to complete, if you never did anything wrong in the game.  I doubt even the hardest of the hardcore have that kind of an attention span.

    Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone’s feelings.

  61. 0
    Andrew Eisen says:

    "These violent video games, on the other hand, can contain up to 800 hours of footage with the most atrocious content often reserved for the highest levels and can be accessed only by advanced players after hours upon hours of progressive mastery."

    Absolutely, completely, totally false.

    Yee has been saying this for years which proves he still knows nothing about video games and hasn’t done a thing to educate himself on the subject nor has he listened to the multiple criticisms pointing out how misinformed he is.

    Or he’s simply lying and thinks we’re all too stupid to know better.

     

    Andrew Eisen

  62. 0
    jedidethfreak says:

    Your math is off.  100 studies in 52 weeks = 2 studies demonstrating a causal effect a week, not one every two weeks.

    Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone’s feelings.

  63. 0
    JDKJ says:

    Unfortunately, if there are no amici filing briefs in support of the Respondent’s side of the matter (and there are none that I’m yet aware of), then these sorts of misstatements may well go unchallenged.

  64. 0
    Rennie Davis says:

     

    There is an egregious misstatement in the brief.
     
    On page 4, Yee et al state, “In 2006, a Federal Trade Commission study revealed that nearly 70 percent of 13 to 16 year olds are able to successfully purchase Mature or M-rated video games.” In fact, the FTC’s 2006 secret shopper survey found that 13- to 16-year-olds that it sent into stores were able to purchase Mature-rated games only 42% of the time. Besides being patently false, this statement ignores the fact that last year the FTC found that the purchase rate for Mature-rated games had fallen to 20%.
     

     

  65. 0
    LegendaryGamer00 says:

     

    "Parents can read a book, watch a movie or listen to a CD to discern if it is appropriate for their child. These violent video games, on the other hand, can contain up to 800 hours of footage with the most atrocious content often reserved for the highest levels and can be accessed only by advanced players after hours upon hours of progressive mastery."

     

    3 Things.

    1. If I had 0.1% of a penny every time Yee has said either "Level" or "Levels", I would have enough money to pay off the National Debt ten times over.

    2. He says "Footage", not Gameplay. Does he have ANY I-FUCKING-DEA how big the filesize would be?(Odds are he wouldn’t because he most likely doesn’t know what a computer file is)

    *Activating Insanity Mode* 3. Music and Movies are just as bad as games. With music, you can sing every filthy lyric just as it is sung on the CD. With movies, it goes into extreme detail. It shows EVERY LITTLE BIT OF GORE CLOSE UP, for the viewers entertainment, easilv able to copy every move done.(Slight Sarcasm)

     

    Final Words: The last game Yee played was Pong.

     

     

    ——————– Making the world a better place… one Headshot at a time…

  66. 0
    Arell says:

    Let’s not forget that parents are already given a comprehensive checklist of the types of content in the game, with the ESRB "content descriptors."  Even if you fool someone into believing that a parent is faced with the daunting task of reviewing "800 hours of footage," they don’t even need to view it personally.  Just flip the box over and read the label.

    It is in no way hard for a parent to be proactive in their child’s video game usage.  At least on this point, there is no need for legislation.

  67. 0
    jedidethfreak says:

    Let’s not forget that most people find out about games through gaming magazines or the internet.  What’s stopping parents from reading the same thing their kids are?

    Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone’s feelings.

  68. 0
    cppcrusader says:

    "Parents can read a book, watch a movie or listen to a CD to discern if it is appropriate for their child. These violent video games, on the other hand, can contain up to 800 hours of footage with the most atrocious content often reserved for the highest levels and can be accessed only by advanced players after hours upon hours of progressive mastery."

    How the hell did this idea come about in the last 10-15 years that it’s so difficult for a parent to determine what media is acceptable for their child?  It didn’t seem that difficult for my parents in the 80’s and early 90’s.  They would read the back of the box of movies and games, look at the screenshots provided there and that was all you needed to know.  All the information a parent needs to make an informed decision exists on that 7"x5" rectangle.

    Not to mention the fact that if his argument is that it takes so much time for a parent to vette something for their child, why even list reading a book?  Does he not even realize how long it takes the average person to read a book?

    Oh, and I would love to know what this 800 hour game is, that’d be a good deal for sixty bucks.

  69. 0
    Andrew Eisen says:


    Let me add this: yes, the state has a compelling interest to protect children from psychological harm.  However, if you want to restrict speech in order to do that you have to first do three very important things: 

    1. Prove there’s something out there that’s psychologically harming children that the state needs to protect them from. (Sorry, increased aggression doesn’t constitute psychological harm.)

    2. Prove that your law will actually protect children from psychological harm. (Does the law keep kids from playing the games? No? Then it fails.)

    3. Prove that your law would be more effective then the measures already out there. (Will a sales restriction work better then game ratings, parental involvement, parental controls, and the oodles of readily available information? No. Especially considering that well over ninety percent of the time, kids aren’t the ones buying the games anyway!)

     

     

    Andrew Eisen

  70. 0
    Magic says:

    Got any sources about Elvis and the evils of Rock and Roll? I’d love to read about it.

    Also:
    These violent video games, on the other hand, can contain up to 800 hours of footage with the most atrocious content often reserved for the highest levels and can be accessed only by advanced players after hours upon hours of progressive mastery.

    Over three thousand peer-reviewed studies, produced over a period of 30 years documenting the effects of screen violence (including violent video games), have now been published…

    These data suggest very strongly that participating in the playing of violent video games by children and youth increase aggressive thought and behavior; increase antisocial behavior and delinquency; engender poor school performance; desensitize the game player to violence…

    I’m apalled at each of these statements (i.e. "WTF?!"). What game has 800 hours of footage? Thousands of studies have evidence that screen violence directly has effects on people? Video games are a direct cause of the list of ills and anti-social behaviour?

    I don’t know where to begin. Like Elvis, people will one day look back and be astonished at the absolute nonsensical worrying about gaming from alleged experts of some sort.

  71. 0
    GoodRobotUs says:

    "The interactive nature of video games is vastly different than passively listening to music, watching a movie, or reading a book. With interactive video games, the child becomes a part of the action which serves as a potent agent to facilitate violence and over time learns the destructive behaviour."

    Funny, they said the same thing about the interactiveness of dancing and how Rock and Roll promoted promiscuity and violence…

    Let’s not forget about the Censorship of Elvis’ hips because of the adverse effect it might have on young girls.

     

    I suppose if Hollywood can keep regurgitating stuff from several decades ago in the hope it’ll work this time, so can Yee.

Leave a Reply