Nine States Support Video Game Industry in SCOTUS Battle

September 18, 2010 -

The Legal Times reports that the states supporting the video game industry's side of the Supreme Court fight include Utah, Rhode Island, Oklahoma, Washington, Georgia, Arkansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Carolina, and the wonderful territory of Puerto Rico. You can grab that brief here (Thanks again to our Shoutbox hero BearDogg-X).

The brief was written by Rhode Island Attorney General Patrick Lynch and supported by Irell & Manella in Los Angeles. The main argument of states supporting the industry is that the California law is an overreach, against First Amendment freedom, and puts an undue burden on law enforcement, who have better things to do. The brief also points out that the law opens up the possibility of criminals using the defense "video games made me do it."

The blog points out that both Lynch and Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff received campaign contributions from the Entertainment Software Association. The point has been noted elsewhere, but this particular blog likes to report on lobbyists efforts.

Posted in

Comments

Re: Nine States Support Video Game Industry in SCOTUS Battle

Utah? Why do I get the feelign the Eagler Forum's monarhc might be packing up and moving soon?

Re: Nine States Support Video Game Industry in SCOTUS Battle

I love the disconect between goverment and the public..... this is why lobbying should be baned and they should not be paid much more than minuim wage they are not noblity and should not be treated as it, rather they get meals,houseing and secuirty more like public houseing mixed with high secuirty..... unless they want to pay for thier own houseing....


I have a dream, break the chains of copy right oppression! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/2010/05/21/cigital-disobedience/


Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.

---

http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/

Re: Nine States Support Video Game Industry in SCOTUS Battle

 Y'know of all the reasons to strike down these laws, i honestly didn't think about the law making it possible for the "video games made me do it defense". It actually does make sense. I mean this law is setting all kinds of precedence, one of which is the idea that video games ARE harmful to minors. If the supreme court rules in favor with this law they will be ruling that video games are harmful and can influence people's actions. As such, criminals may have the opening to bring up their video game playing habits as a way to claim that they did not have full control over their actions in an effort to reduce their sentences. 

Re: Nine States Support Video Game Industry in SCOTUS Battle

In reading the Salt Lake Tribune article linked in GP's story listing the amicus briefs, the "Common Sense" Media moron Jim Steyer had the nerve to call Mark Shurtleff's claims of more "Video Games made me do it" defenses "laughable at best".

Has that motard Steyer been following the news for the last several years when a certain disbarred attorney from Florida was hoping that his 15 minutes of fame clock was stuck at 14:59 to gain infamy off that very claim?

Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Hornets, Jack Thompson can geaux chase a chupacabra. Hell will stay frozen over for quite a while since the Saints won the Super Bowl.

Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Pelicans. Solidarity for the Saints = No retreat, no surrender. 2013 = Saints' revenge on the NFL. Even through the darkest days, this fire burns always.

Re: Nine States Support Video Game Industry in SCOTUS Battle

 Yes I noticed that aswell, instead of actually ADDRESSING Shurtleff's concerns he just flat out dismisses it and claims he's just being bought out by the industry; he makes absolutely no attempt to prove Shurtleff wrong. Though i guess that is why Steyer isn't a LAWYER; he's got no sense for laws and just does what FEELS right without taking into account the full effect of the legal consequences. 

And really that's a big reason why so many of these laws pop up only to be struck down... because those making these laws are doing what feels right, but never bother to address the very real legit concerns that the opponents bring up; and these concerns likely play a big role in getting the laws struck down in court, since unlike the backers of these laws the court DOES take those legit concerns into account and REQUIRE a proper answer. 

Re: Nine States Support Video Game Industry in SCOTUS Battle

Actually, Steyer is a lawyer. His bio on CSM says he was a former prosecutor, and he teaches constitutional law at Stanford. He just hasn't been an active member of the bar for some time.

Re: Nine States Support Video Game Industry in SCOTUS Battle

 I see my mistake then. I did try to quickly look up some info but all i got was that he was the ceo of CSM and a consulting professor at Stanford; apparently i didn't look hard enough. Though granted, he wouldn't be the first lawyer to place himself on the wrong side of this debate

Re: Nine States Support Video Game Industry in SCOTUS Battle

Well the irony is that the entire premise of these laws is that playing violent video games will make youth do horrible things...then to turn around and say the concept of a defense based on this premise is "laughable at best" is an incredible about face.

 

Re: Nine States Support Video Game Industry in SCOTUS Battle

Out of curiosity have any of those states tried to lure the game industry to thme with tax breaks or other such things?

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

Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it's over they have the same positions they started in.

---------------------------------------------------- Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it's over they have the same positions they started in.

Re: Nine States Support Video Game Industry in SCOTUS Battle

Utah - Home of an EA studio and recently tried to pass legislation restricting game sales

Rhode Island - Is trying to lure 38 Studios with a giant loan.

Oklahoma - Passed legislation that restricted sales of video games that wsa ruled unconstitutional. Has had a bill on record to provide tax incentives to game developers that has yet to make it to vote.

Washington - Home of Microsoft.

Georgia - Has game developer Tax incentives, home to a number of developers.

Not to sure about the rest. A google search might clear it up.

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

Re: Nine States Support Video Game Industry in SCOTUS Battle

Washington - also had a law restricting sales to minors ruled unconstitutional(the first state to pass a law, even).

Georgia - AG Thurbert Baker also received campaign contributions from the ESA.

South Carolina - AG Henry McMaster has an ESRB Awareness PSA on his website.

Edit: Nebraska - AG Jon Bruning did an ESRB Awareness PSA as well.

Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Hornets, Jack Thompson can geaux chase a chupacabra. Hell will stay frozen over for quite a while since the Saints won the Super Bowl.

Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Pelicans. Solidarity for the Saints = No retreat, no surrender. 2013 = Saints' revenge on the NFL. Even through the darkest days, this fire burns always.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Sora-ChanI realize that they have ways getting around it, but one reason might be due to earthquakes.04/17/2014 - 4:42am
Matthew WilsonSF is a tech/ economic/ trade center it should be mostly tail building. this whole problem is because of the lack of tail buildings. How would having tail apartment buildings destroy SF? having tail buildings has not runed other cities around the US/world04/16/2014 - 10:51pm
Matthew WilsonAgain the issue is you can not build upwards anywhere in SF at the moment, and no you would not. You would bring prices to where they should have been before the market distortion. those prices are not economic or socially healthy.04/16/2014 - 10:46pm
ZippyDSMleeYou still wind up pushing people out of the non high rise aeras but tis least damage you can do all things considered.04/16/2014 - 10:26pm
ZippyDSMleeANd by mindlessly building upward you make it like every place else hurting property prices,ect,ect. You'll have to slowly segment the region into aeras where you will never build upward then alow some aeras to build upward.04/16/2014 - 10:25pm
Matthew WilsonSF have to build upwards they have natural growth limits. they can not grow outwards. ps growing outwards is terable just look at Orlando or Austin for that.04/16/2014 - 4:15pm
ZippyDSMleeIf they built upward then it would becoem like every other place making it worthless, if they don't build upward they will price people out making it worthless, what they need to do is a mix of things not just one exstreme or another.04/16/2014 - 4:00pm
Matthew Wilsonyou know the problem in SF was not the free market going wrong right? it was government distortion. by not allowing tall buildings to be build they limited supply. that is not free market.04/16/2014 - 3:48pm
ZippyDSMleeOh gaaa the free market is a lie as its currently leading them to no one living there becuse they can not afford it makign it worthless.04/16/2014 - 3:24pm
Matthew WilsonIf you have not read http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/04/introducing-steam-gauge-ars-reveals-steams-most-popular-games/ you should. It is a bit stats heavy, but worth the read.04/16/2014 - 2:04pm
Matthew Wilsonthe issue is when is doesn't work it can screw over millions in new york city's case. more often than not it is better to let the free market run its course without market distortion.04/16/2014 - 9:36am
NeenekoTrue, and overdone stagnation is a problem. It is a tricky balance. It does not help that when it does work, no one notices. Most people here have benifited from rent controls and not even realized it.04/16/2014 - 9:23am
ZippyDSMleehttp://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2014/04/15/riaa_files_civil_suit_against_megaupload04/16/2014 - 8:48am
ZippyDSMleeEither way you get stagnation as people can not afford the prices they set.04/16/2014 - 8:47am
Neenekowell, specifically it helps people already living there and hurts people who want to live there instead. As for 'way more hurt', majorities generally need less legal protection. yes it hurt more people then it helped, it was written for a minority04/16/2014 - 8:30am
MaskedPixelantehttp://torrentfreak.com/square-enix-drm-boosts-profits-and-its-here-to-stay-140415/ Square proves how incredibly out of touch they are by saying that DRM is the way of the future, and is here to stay.04/16/2014 - 8:29am
james_fudgeUnwinnable Weekly Telethon playing Metal Gear http://www.twitch.tv/rainydayletsplay04/16/2014 - 8:06am
ConsterTo be fair, there's so little left of the middle class that those numbers are skewing.04/16/2014 - 7:42am
Matthew Wilsonyes it help a sub section of the poor, but hurt both the middle and upper class. in the end way more people were hurt than helped. also, it hurt most poor people as well.04/16/2014 - 12:13am
SeanBJust goes to show what I have said for years. Your ability to have sex does not qualify you for parenthood.04/15/2014 - 9:21pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician