ESA Responds to Schwarzenegger v. EMA California Brief

July 14, 2010 -

While the Entertainment Software Association (ESA) has until September 10 to file its own brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in regards to Schwarzenegger v. EMA, the organization issued a statement in reaction to a brief filed by the state of California on Monday.

Trumpeting the ESA's dominating string of victories in such cases, and perhaps attempting to take some of the wind out of the sails of California State Senator Leland Yee, ESA President and CEO Michael Gallagher stated:

Computer and video games are First Amendment protected speech. There is an unbroken chain of more than a dozen previous court rulings agreeing. Courts across the country recognize that computer and video games, like other protected expression such as movies, books, and music, have an artistic viewpoint, and use sounds and images to create an experience and immerse the player in art. That is why other courts have unanimously affirmed that video games are entitled to the same constitutional protection as movies, music, books, and other forms of art.

California’s law is no different than others before it. It is clearly unconstitutional under First Amendment principles. We look forward to presenting our arguments in the Supreme Court of the United States and vigorously defending the works of our industry’s creators, storytellers and innovators.


Comments

Re: ESA Responds to Schwarzenegger v. EMA California Brief

I hope for this law to fail just to see Mr. Yee and the governator cry like babies.

http://www.magicinkgaming.com/

Re: ESA Responds to Schwarzenegger v. EMA California Brief

How about because it's a bad law?

Seriously, guys, let's be adults here.

Re: ESA Responds to Schwarzenegger v. EMA California Brief

"California’s law is no different than others before it. It is clearly unconstitutional under First Amendment principles."

Forget constitutionality.  Hell, forget the niggling detail that there's no harm to protect children from in the first place.

This law, flat-out, would not work.  It would do nothing to prevent children from playing violent games (even if they did cause harm).  I think that's enough to shoot it down right there.

 

Andrew Eisen

Re: ESA Responds to Schwarzenegger v. EMA California Brief

Hasn't exactly stopped the drinking age or the drug war.

Re: ESA Responds to Schwarzenegger v. EMA California Brief

Yes, the CA law certainly isn't alone in that regard.  Plenty laws that any 6-year-old could tell you wouldn't work make it on the books.

 

Andrew Eisen

Re: ESA Responds to Schwarzenegger v. EMA California Brief

It's been my experience that most 6 year olds have a lot more sense than many adults.

===============

Chris Kimberley

===============

Chris Kimberley

Re: ESA Responds to Schwarzenegger v. EMA California Brief

I just realized there has been no mention of the ESRB ratings (a private organization) being given the force of law.  I take it then that the law is looking for alternative methods of determining which games are "offensive"?

Re: ESA Responds to Schwarzenegger v. EMA California Brief

Yeah. The law is not based on the ESRB ratings or anything like that. It is based on a definition of "excessive violence" that is put in place by whom ever is the elected official in the city in which the complaint is raised or the state Attorney General.

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

Re: ESA Responds to Schwarzenegger v. EMA California Brief

I call california's Brief The equiviant of Jack thompson's bizzare Commentary on his Lawsuits

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

America has just became its own version of the Jerry Springer Show after a bizarre moment in Florida involving a carnival worker.

Re: ESA Responds to Schwarzenegger v. EMA California Brief

I don't think it's quite on the same level as JT's bizarre rantings.  It's dead wrong, of course, but it's not completely insane.

I think that's the main difference between Thompson and Yee.  Yee's basically a good guy, he's polite and he engages the video game community with respect.  I disagree, fundamentally, with his stance, and I believe, strongly, that he's wasting the time and money of a state that's already in dire financial straits in order to attempt to curtail freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment.  But at least he's not a raving lunatic.

Re: ESA Responds to Schwarzenegger v. EMA California Brief

I think that Yee is a douche and he just is educated enough to deguise it behind a polite attitude, but when everything this fail (and it will) we will see his real face, not very far of what Jack Thompson was some years ago.

No one can claim that an entire industry and its users are a danger for society and being 100% polite.

------------------------------------------------------------ My DeviantArt Page (aka DeviantCensorship): http://www.darkknightstrikes.deviantart.com

Re: ESA Responds to Schwarzenegger v. EMA California Brief

Now see, calling someone childish names because he disagrees with you IS the sort of thing JT's famous for.  This is the exact point I'm making -- we can disagree with people like Yee without stooping to JT's level, and Yee can show the same respect to us.

I don't agree with the guy, I think his position is utterly wrongheaded and misguided, and I think his crusade is a spectacularly bad idea.  But he doesn't go around calling people douches.

Re: ESA Responds to Schwarzenegger v. EMA California Brief

Call you names? He threatens to sue every other person.

Re: ESA Responds to Schwarzenegger v. EMA California Brief

Er, you know he's a state senator, not a practicing lawyer, right?

Re: ESA Responds to Schwarzenegger v. EMA California Brief

You mean how he was extremely sure he would come out victorious but all he was doing was taking someone's pencil and going "Haha, now you can't write!!!"

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Should 'Hatred' have been removed from Steam Greenlight?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Matthew Wilsonhttp://www.businessinsider.com/xbox-one-virtual-reality-headset-will-compete-with-oculus-rift-2014-12 can a xbo even handle doing vr?12/21/2014 - 10:48pm
PHX Corp@Adam802 We'll break out the popcorn in June12/19/2014 - 9:23pm
ZippyDSMleeMaskedPixelante: I'm itching to start it too but I will wait till the patch goes live. >>12/19/2014 - 7:52pm
Adam802Leland Yee and Jackson get trial date: http://sfbay.ca/2014/12/18/leland-yee-keith-jackson-get-trial-date/12/19/2014 - 5:24pm
MaskedPixelanteNevermind. Turns out when they said "the patch is now live", they meant "it's still in beta".12/19/2014 - 5:07pm
MaskedPixelanteSo I bought Dark Souls PC, and it's forcing me to log into GFWL. Did I miss something?12/19/2014 - 5:00pm
Matthew Wilsonhttp://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/12/republicans-may-have-plan-to-save-internet-providers-from-utility-rules/ this is intreasting. congress may put net nutrality in to law to avoid title 2 classification12/19/2014 - 2:45pm
Matthew Wilsonhttp://www.polygon.com/2014/12/19/7421953/bullshit-cards-against-humanity-donated-250k-sunlight-foundation I have to admit I like the choice o organization. congrats to CAH.12/19/2014 - 1:51pm
E. Zachary KnightIf you are downloading a copy in order to bypass the DRM, then you are legally in the wrong. Ethically, if you bought the game, it doesn't matter where you download it in the future.12/19/2014 - 12:06pm
InfophileEZK: Certainly better that way, though not foolproof. Makes me think though: does it count as piracy if you download a game you already paid for, just not from the place you paid for it at? Ethically, I'd say no, but legally, probably yes.12/19/2014 - 11:20am
ZippyDSMleeAnd I still spent 200$ in the last month on steam/GOG stuff sales get me nearly every time ><12/19/2014 - 10:55am
ZippyDSMleeMaskedPixelante:And this is why I'm a one legged bandit.12/19/2014 - 10:51am
ZippyDSMleeE. Zachary Knight: I buy what I can as long as I can get cracks for it...then again it I could have gotton Lords of the Fallen for 30 with DLC I would have ><12/19/2014 - 10:50am
MaskedPixelantehttp://www.joystiq.com/2014/12/19/marvel-vs-capcom-origins-leaving-online-storefronts-soon/ Speaking of "last chance to buy", Marvel vs. Capcom Origins is getting delisted from all major storefronts. Behold the wonders of the all digital future.12/19/2014 - 9:59am
MaskedPixelanteSeriously, the so-called "Last Chance" sale was up to 80% off, while this one time only return sale goes for a flat 85% off with a 90% off upgrade if you buy the whole catalogue.12/19/2014 - 9:37am
E. Zachary KnightInfophile, Tha is why I buy only DRM-free games.12/19/2014 - 9:37am
MaskedPixelanteNordic is back on GOG for one weekend only. And at 85% off no less, which is kind of a slap in the face to people who paid more during the "NORDIC IS LEAVING FOREVER BUY NOW OR FOREVER HOLD YOUR PEACE" sale, but whatever...12/19/2014 - 9:28am
InfophileRe PHX's link: This is one of the reasons the digital revolution isn't all it's cracked up to be. There's also the flip side where Sony can block access to games you've bought if they ban your account for unrelated reasons. All power is theirs.12/19/2014 - 8:52am
MaskedPixelantehttp://uplay.ubi.com/#!/en-US/events/uplay-15-days You can win FREE GAMES FOR A YEAR! Unfortunately, they're Ubisoft games.12/18/2014 - 6:29pm
Papa MidnightAh, so it was downtime. I've been seeing post appear in my RSS feed, but I was unable to access GamePolitics today across several ISPs.12/18/2014 - 6:06pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician