The Entertainment Software Association, the trade group which represents the interests of US video game publishers, issued a press release today claiming that enrollment in its Video Game Voters Network has reached 150,000.

ESA president Michael Gallagher is quoted in the release:

VGVN members should be proud of their robust activity in support of computer and video games. These dedicated activists are crucial in efforts to fight back state government attempts to regulate computer and video games. With each political challenge, gamers stepped up and made their voices heard by elected officials. We know that from California to New York and state capitols in between, members of the VGVN directly contacted their representatives and expressed their opinions.

 

But, we can’t and won’t let up. As Americans go to the polls this fall, the gaming community is paying attention and will actively engage in the political process.

 

Politicians who think easy political points can be scored at the First Amendment’s expense need to know that such efforts will be aggressively opposed by the gamer community. VGVN members believe that parental education, not government regulation, is the way to ensure our children only have access to age-appropriate games.

 

When last we heard from the Girl Scouts in relation to video game issues, they were standing behind California's Leland Yee following passage of the state's 2005 video game law.

But, as reported by the Woodbury Bulletin, a Minnesota Girl Scout has a much different view on video game regulation. Colleen Stone, who created a 10-minute video on game content issues, told the newspaper:

I guess it all started when Hillary Clinton started getting public about video games and video game violence. It was just a blatant disregard for first amendment rights…That was a slippery slope that would easily have transferred to books and movies and newspapers, and that really disturbed me.

In response, Colleen developed a seminar to educate parents on game content and ratings. She invited the manager of a local GameStop as well as a rep from the Minnesota-based National Institute on Media & Family. The seminar was filmed and makes up a good chunk of her video. 250 copies have been distributed to various organizations.

Colleen, who will attend Johns Hopkins University in the fall and is considering a career in video game design, added:

I was worried this was just a pet peeve of mine, but deep down, it’s a constitutional issue. Some games can be so beautiful — some of the games I put on, my mom will just stop and stare… That’s why I think I did this. Video games are not evil.

 

The Entertainment Consumers Association (ECA) announced yesterday that is now has 40 local chapters. The ECA, of course, is the non-profit organization that represents video gamers.

From the press release:

These newly formed networks give consumers the opportunity to connect with like-minded gamers in their area. Participation is open to activities like ECA-sponsored LAN parties, fund-raisers and contests in addition to attending local events, conferences and shows.

 

ECA chapters are forming now in local gaming communities and college campuses all across the country. They adopt the collective goal of educating the community on political issues that directly affect the interactive entertainment industry and broadening the ECA’s mission – to give gamers a voice.

ECA chapter relations manager Thomas Valentino added:

With over 40 ECA chapters already formed and many more on the way, we’re incredibly encouraged by the number of gamers that have taken the initiative and embraced our vision. In the coming months, we plan to coordinate group advocacy efforts that continue to preserve our rights as gamers.

The ECA also announced that it had assumed management of the National Association for the Protection of Video Games (NAPVG), a Facebook group for politically-minded gamers.

Full Disclosure Dept: The ECA is the parent company of GamePolitics…

Recently, GamePolitics reported on efforts by Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL) to regulate Second Life over concerns about "toilet sex" and other adult content.

Rep. Kirk's efforts have not gone unnoticed by Second Life satirist General JC Christian, who pens an open letter to the Congressman:

I imagine that with the strength of the economy, our rising standard of living, the Floridization of our climate, and the success we're experiencing in Iraq and Afghanistan, it must be very tough to be a congressman these days. There just aren't a lot of pressing problems left to address. I mean you can't vote for torture and domestic spying every day.

That's why I'm glad you're putting so much effort into solving the problem of toilet sex in Second Life... I spend a lot of time on SL, but it never occurred to me that toilet sex even occurred there. So imagine my surprise when I discovered a monument to toilet sex, the Larry Craig Center, not more than 50 meters from my SL GOP Headquarters...

GP: In case you can't place the name, Larry Craig is the Republican Senator from Idaho who was arrested last year for soliciting sex in an airport men's room.

John Douglas, a former game industry worker who says he has played over 7,000 titles, has once again criticized violence in video games.

As reported by Christian news site OneNewsNow, Douglas has called upon Congress to create legislation regulating video games. From the report:

Douglas... contends that the recent release of Grand Theft Auto IV shows that the video game industry will not regulate itself. The former police officer points out that the game has received an "M" (Mature) rating, which means that anyone under the age of 17 years should not play the game...

Douglas is especially critical of the ESRB, and advised parents not to trust its ratingss:

Currently the people rating these games for the ESRB don't even play these games. There's needs to be some kind of common-sense application that's put forth as to how these games are rated... Why isn't there a law to prevent it? Because every time the state passes a law that says children cannot play these games, it's [labeled as] a crime. The media coalition and the industry itself, they hire attorneys, they file an appeal, they find a judge, and they have it overthrown saying it's a violation of the First Amendment.

Douglas, who now runs Grand Design Productions, a "family friendly" animations studio, refers to violent games as "spiritual cyanide" in a video interview.

Last week GamePolitics reported on HR5990, a new piece of video game legislation proposed in Congress by Reps. Lee Terry (R-NE) and Jim Matheson (D-UT).

Also known as the Video Games Rating Enforcement Act, the bill would require retailers to check ID for buyers of M-rated games.

The Entertainment Consumers Association (ECA) has issued an action alert on this bill. ECA members and non-members alike can click here to voice their thoughts about HR5990 to their congressional representative. From the action alert:

HR 5990, the Video Games Rating Enforcement Act, is another Congressional attempt to unconstitutionally regulate the sale of video games.  If it’s passed, the federal courts will find it unconstitutional – and at great expense to taxpayers. 

By raising our voices now, we can let Congress know that we, as taxpayers and constituents, would rather they use their time and our money to discuss more pressing issues such as the war in Iraq, universal healthcare and the national economy.

GP: Readers may find it worth noting that Rep. Terry alleged that in some games players earn points by committing rape. However in an exclusive interview with GamePolitics, the Congressman admitted that he could not name a single game which featured rape.

Rep. Terry was also unaware of last week's Federal Trade Commission report which showed that game retailers were successful 80% of the time in turning away underage buyers. Rep. Terry instead was relying on 2003 data in which retailers had only a 31% turn-away rate.

Full Disclosure Dept: The ECA is the parent company of GamePolitics…

Recently GamePolitics reported that Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL) had called upon the Federal Trade Commission to issue a parental alert regarding online game Second Life.

A local political blog has more, written from a decidely pro-Kirk perspective:

As usual, Congressman Kirk was extremely impressive... He began the interview by talking about his concern over the Internet alternate universe of "Second Life," which Kirk views as an uncontrolled and fertile ground for Internet predators due to insufficient age controls and restrictions.

A lot of people are paying attention to this important issue, and this week I have read numerous pieces, mostly on the blogs, that seem to be either strongly supportive of Kirk's efforts, or strongly against Kirk's stand. Among those who support Kirk are parents...

The ones who are critical of Kirk fall mainly into two camps: first, people who are either big fans of Second Life or similar games, or are somehow involved in the Internet gaming industry (and thus seem to be very defensive against what they perceive as government over-regulation); and, second, the usual anti-Kirk crowd who dismiss this as a political stunt.

Kirk spoke about Second Life on a local TV news program: 

Parents should be worried about one of the fastest growing websites on the planet called Second Life. It's the next level up from MySpace, a fully interactive 3-D experience... I'm worried that they don't properly screen for children...

I contacted Second Life to say maybe we should have some minimum standards here but they responded by sending their $60,000 a year K Street lobbyist to tell me everything was okay...

GP: Who can argue with with protecting children from predators? On the other hand, we have to wonder how much of a problem this really is on Second Life. It's certainly not the most action-oriented game going and would seemingly have little attraction for younger players. Perhaps some of our SL-savvy readers will weigh with their thoughts on this issue.

As GamePolitics  has previously reported, Take Two Interactive sued the Chicago Transit Authority in U.S. District Court over the CTA's recent decision to pull advertisements for Grand Theft Auto IV from its vehicles and facilities.

GP has obtained a copy of the lawsuit and you can grab it here (43-page pdf). From the complaint:

Take-Two's GTA IV advertisments promote an entirely lawful, mainstream entertainment product enjoyed by millions of Americans...

Defendants [CTA and ad company Titan Outdoor] are state actors. The advertising space that CTA maintains on Chicago's mass transit system is a public forum. CTA and its agents... for years have displayed a wide variety of political and issue-oriented... messages...

The removal of the [GTA IV] advertisments... followed a report by the local Fox News affiliate questioning why CTA allowed advertising for an "M" rated video game in light of a recent wave of violent crimes in Chicago... The Governor of Illinois has previously criticized other games in the Grand Theft Auto series... Neither the recent crimes nor the Governor's personal views on video games permitted CTA or Titan to violate Take-Two's constitutional and contractual rights...

An exclusive GamePolitics interview with Rep. Lee Terry (R) demonstrates that the Nebraska Congressman, co-sponsor of a new video game ratings enforcement bill, has a grasp on some video game rating issues, yet a flawed understanding of others. 

As reported earlier this week by GamePolitics, Terry and Rep. Jim Matheson (D-UT) introduced the Video Games Rating Enforcement Act. If approved, the bill would mandate that game retailers check IDs of mature-rated game buyers. The measure would also require that information detailing the rating system be posted in view of customers. Terry spoke to GP about the proposal:

This is a rather simple bill in that it focuses on making sure that retailers ID young folks when they try to buy an M or A[O] rated game. And this is kind of my approach instead of trying to micromanage by legislation the standards or content...

What we'd rather do is just make sure that parents are empowered with information, what the standards really mean and then what's specifically in that game and then to make sure that retailers don't subvert the parent's decision... If they don't want their child to have an M-rated game, the retailers don't sell it to them...

Based on the timing of the new legislation, we asked Terry whether it was planned to coincide with the intense publicity surrounding the April 29th release of Grand Theft Auto IV. Terry, however, maintained that the timing was purely coincidental:

As a matter of fact, I almost thought about waiting another week or two. I will have to take some responsibility. Mr. Matheson brought this to me several months ago and... it kind of got pushed to the back burner. So it was more coincidental... but [the GTA IV hype] probably did heighten the scrutiny of the bill within the press, which is a positive thing. But we did not wait until Grand Theft Auto IV came out to drop the bill. That was coincidental.

Oddly enough, the Terry-Matheson bill, which addresses video game rating enforcement, was introduced on Wednesday, less than 24 hours before the Federal Trade Commission's latest report gave glowing marks to the video game industry for its retail ratings enforcement. Terry, however, was clearly not acquainted with the results of the FTC report, citing 69% as the rate at which FTC secret shoppers were able to purchase M-rated games. That figure, however, is from the FTC's 2003 survey. In 2006 the number dropped to 42%. Yesterday's figure was an impressive 20%. We asked Terry about the FTC report:

As GamePolitics reported last month, Minnesota Attorney General Lori Swanson (left) appealed a decision by the US 8th Circuit Court which held that a lower court was correct in ruling the state's 2006 "fine the buyer" video game law unconstitutional.

In her appeal, Swanson was seeking what is known as an en banc review of the case, in which all of the 8th Circuit's judges would review the decision made by a three-judge panel in March.

GamePolitics has now learned that the 8th Circuit has declined to hold the en banc review. This means that the only legal recourse available to Minnesota is an appeal to the US Supreme Court.

If that happens, it will be the first time that the Supreme Court has considered a case involving video game legislation. Making this possibility especially intriguing are comments made by Justice Antonin Scalia to Law of Play's Anthony Prestia in February of this year:

Justice Scalia replied that he did believe such legislation was constitutional. He began by explaining his belief that sound constitutional precedent holds that minors may be subjected to prohibitions that adults are not – he instantly drew the parallel to regulation of pornography sales…

Justice Scalia did not suggest that violent and/or sexual content in games rises to the level of unprotected speech. In fact, he did not even suggest that video games themselves are not protected by the First Amendment…

We've got a call in to A.G. Swanson's office to see whether an appeal to the Supreme Court is planned. In the meantime, you can view the 8th Circuit's denial of Minnesota's en banc request.

Politicians just can't seem to get it right, so attorney and avid gamer Mark Methenitis, who pens the excellent Law of the Game blog, has written a guide for elected officials with a yen to legislate games.

Why? Methenitis explains:

I'm not opposed to keeping things out of the hands of kids that their parents don't want them to have. On the other hand, I'm also not opposed to letting the parents make the choices. About the only thing I am opposed to is letting the government decide what I or my eventual kids can play. I am an adult, and I can make those decisions for myself and for my children when I become a parent.

Methenitis pens a nine-point plan. Hit the Law of the Game for the details, we'll just summarize:

1. Forget the idea that you're only regulating games.
2. Use the industry's rating systems.
3. Forget 'banning' anything.
4. Forget basing this on obscenity or harm to children. Use commerce.
5. Forget the 'AO' rating for games.
6. Enforce it only on products that have to be sold to those over 17.
7. Enforce it only on sales to those who can't present ID or present fake ID.
8. This should be a fine only offense, and only a fine against the store.
9. Once it's done, leave it alone.

GP: While we don't agree with everything Methenitis has to say here, it's definitely a worthwhile read.

Thanks to: GP correspondent Andrew Eisen for the heads-up!

Michael Gallagher (left), CEO of the Entertainment Software Association, which represents a number of US video game publishers, has commented on a bill introduced in Congress earlier this week.

The Video Games Rating Enforcement Act, proposed by Reps. Lee Terry (R-NE) and Jim Matheson (D-UT) would require retailers to conduct ID checks on buyers of games featuring mature content. Of the measure, Gallager said:
 

The [ESA] shares Reps. Matheson and Terry’s goal of ensuring children are playing parent-approved computer and video games. That is why the ESA consistently works with parent groups, encouraging caregivers to check each game’s ESRB rating and content descriptors—a system three-quarters of parents rely on regularly according to the Federal Trade Commission.

We also urge parents to make use of the parental controls available on all new games consoles. 

 

Empowering parents, not enacting unconstitutional legislation, is the best way to control the games children play.

GP: Don't miss our exclusive interview with bill co-sponsor Rep. Lee Terry...

Variety reports that a new legislative attempt to regulate video game sales has been launched in Congress.

Undoubtedly spurred on by the publicity surrounding the recent Grand Theft Auto IV launch, Reps. Jim Matheson (D-UT) and Lee Terry (R-NE, seen at left) have introduced legislsation that would require game retailers to check a buyer's I.D. before selling a game with adult content.

Of the "Video Games Ratings Enforcement Act," Rep. Terry said:

[The bill seeks to ensure that kids] can only access age appropriate content without parental permission... The images and themes in some video games are shocking and troublesome. In some games high scores are often earned by players who commit 'virtual' murder, assault and rape.

Many young children are walking into stores and are able to buy or rent these games without their parents even knowing about it. Many retailers have tried to develop voluntary policies to make sure mature games do not end up in the hands of young kids, but we need to do more to protect our children.

In addition to mandating ID checks, the proposal would require retailers to post information about the rating system. Violators would face a $5,000 fine. Despite the abysmal record of such legislation on the state level, Terry expressed confidence that the bill would pass constitutional muster:

This bill doesn't involve itself in content or defining the standards for 'mature' or 'adults only. It simply requires the retailer to post what the industry has defined as 'mature' and 'adults only' so that parents can know, and requires checking of identification.

The proposal enjoys the support of the Parents Television Council.

For his part, Rep. Matheson has attempted to legislate video games in the past. As GamePolitics reported in 2006, a Matheson proposal by the same name failed to gain traction.

Rep. Terry was made to look a bit silly by The Daily Show host Jon Stewart following a congressional video game hearing in 2006.

By the way, GamePolitics challenges Rep. Terry to support his claim that rape is a feature in any commercial video game.

UPDATE: Omaha's Fox News affiliate has a report on the bill. Rep. Terry told KPTM-42:

This bill is all about empowering parents so they can make more informed decisions about what games they're kids are playing, knowledge is power and the more we know the better off we'll be.

GameCyte has scored a video interview with California State Sen. Leland Yee (D), and is soliciting questions for Yee from readers.

The Senator, a child psychologist and frequent critic of video game violence, is the architect of California's 2005 video game law, which was overturned by a U.S. District Court judge last year. California has appealed the decision. From GameCyte:

In the interests of stimulating mature discussion about video game violence, GameCyte contacted the offices of California State Senator Leland Yee, an outspoken critic of Rockstar and the ESRB — and received a rather unique opportunity. Want to know if the Senator really saw GTA IV before denouncing it? How Senator Yee feels about current game regulation? What he thinks adults should be able to play? Just ask.

GameCyte readers and fellow gaming journalists are invited to pose questions which the Senator will answer on camera next week, the resulting video to be available here and freely distributed to other interested game publications.

GP: If you want to suggest a question for Sen. Yee, you should jump over to GameCyte...

It took a few days, but GamePolitics has tracked down some background on the process which led Miami-Dade Transit (MDT) officials to pull ads for Grand Theft Auto IV.

As we reported late last month, the South Florida transit agency yanked GTA IV ads from bus shelters following pressure by anti-game attorney Jack Thompson.

While following up on this story GP communicated with MDT Deputy Director Hugh Chen and Marketing Director Michael DeCossio. It was media relations official Manuel Palmiero, however, who ultimately supplied the information below. What follows are GP's question, MDT's verbatim answers and a few bits of commentary:

GP: The GTA IV ads themselves are inoffensive. Is Miami-Dade Transit making a value judgment as to the underlying product? If so, this judgment is based on…?

MDT: The Miami-Dade County Commission has adopted three resolutions in the last five years dealing with violent video games -- R-1447-03, R-248-04 and R-573-06. You may look up all three at www.miamidade.gov/govaction/searchleg.asp?Action=searchleg.

The first resolution specifically condemned the “Grand Theft Auto: Vice City” video game for its “hate-filled messages" and for appearing “to encourage or condone violence against ethnic minorities” and called on retailers to remove the game from their shelves. The other two condemned violent video games in general and urged retailers not to make such games available to minors. 

Miami-Dade Transit is a department of Miami-Dade County and as such follows the policies set by the Miami-Dade County Commission and Mayor.

(GP comment: This seems a rather bureaucratic justification. None of the three resolutions address public transit. Nor do they direct county agencies to take a hands-off posture with regard to video games. Nor does MDT answer the question as to whether they made a value judgment concerning GTA IV, although it seems obvious that they did.)

GP: Which official made the final decision to remove the ads?
 
MDT: After receiving and evaluating the request for removal of the ads, MDT staff made the recommendation to remove them.  [Ad company] Cemusa was instructed to remove the ads last Friday, April 25.

(GP: we received this info from MDT on Friday, May 2nd)
 
GP: Is MDT familiar with Change the Climate vs MBTA, in which the US First Circuit Court ruled that a quasi-governmental transit agency could not restrict ads based on viewpoint?
 
MDT: Miami-Dade Transit is a department of Miami-Dade County and as such is a unit of County government, not a quasi-governmental transit agency.

(GP comment: This answer is puzzling. The First Circuit Court ruled that it is unconstitutional for a quasi-governmental agency to restrict free speech. Since MDT is organized as a full-fledged unit of government, it has at least as much - and probably more - of an obligation not to restrict free speech. Nor does the answer acknowledge the Change the Climate case.)

GP: Is MDT aware of [complainant] Mr. [Jack] Thompson’s longstanding contentious history with the publisher of this game [Take Two Interactive], including his involvement on the plaintiff side in a pair of wrongful death lawsuits seeking $1.2 billion?
 
MDT: We were not aware of this information but it is not relevant to the matter at hand and would not have affected our decision to remove the ads.
 
GP: Other than Thompson’s, were any other complaints received about the ads?
 
MDT: We are not aware of any others to date.

GP:  Would you characterize MDT as a unit of government, as opposed to quasi-governmental? (I note the .gov website address)
 
MDT: As stated above, MDT is a department of Miami-Dade County government and therefore is a unit of government, not a quasi-governmental agency.

GP: What other types of ads are restricted? Alcohol? R-rated movies? How about a cable show along the lines of The Sopranos or Sex in the City? 

MDT: MDT's contract with CEMUSA lists several types of ads that are restricted, including:

-Advertising that contains traffic-related symbols or words like "Stop," Drive In" or "Danger" that are designed to distract vehicular traffic

-Ads containing immoral, lascivious or obscene material as well as ads promoting businesses engaged in any activity that requires that exclusion of minors

-Ads for alcoholic beverages
 
In addition, the contract states that MDT may "at its sole, absolute discretion" disallow any questionable ads, such as those that may violate community standards as we understand them based on our knowledge of the community and the feedback generated by certain types of ads in the past.

(GP comment: Now that Take Two has sued the Chicago Transit Authority over that agency's removal of GTA IV ads, a similar suit against MDT seems highly likely...)

Video game legislation proposed by Boston Mayor Thomas Menino - and authored by Jack Thompson - has stalled in the Massachusetts legislature.

In March legislators heard testimony on HB1423, a bill which would equate violent video games with pornography.

However the Boston Business Journal now reports that the measure has been "sent into study," which essentially means it is on life support. From the Business Journal story:

Menino's proposal, which would make it illegal for minors to buy video games with graphic content, was sent into study in March -- a big win for the state's burgeoning video game industry...

But the mayor, seeing a link between violent content and violent behavior, still is in favor of the proposal, and plans to continue to push for it on a grass-roots level, said Larry Mayes, chief of human services for the city of Boston. "To get this through, we're really going to have to do a statewide push. We want to go to the communities, particularly to the parents and sit with them and show them the material."
 
Mayes said members of the mayor's office plan to hold community meetings starting this summer to educate parents about such violent video games.  
The hope is those parents will then advocate for the ban.

Reuters is reporting that Grand Theft Auto IV publisher Take Two Interactive is suing the Chicago Transit Authority over the CTA's recent decision to remove ads for the game from its vehicles and facilities.

As reported by GamePolitics, the CTA pulled the ads about a week before GTA IV launched. The move followed a sensationalistic Fox News report which seemed to draw a linkage between GTA and a rash of local shootings. From Reuters:

Take Two accused the authority and its sales agent, Titan Outdoor LLC, of violating a $300,000... ad campaign agreement that included running "Grand Theft Auto 4" poster ads on the sides of buses and transit display spaces throughout the Chicago transit system scheduled for six weeks between April and June.

The suit seeks an order for the transit authority to run the ads as well as monetary damages of at least $300,000.

GP: Congrats to Take Two for standing up for its rights. Let's hope they bring the same kind of legal pressure to bear on Miami-Dade Transit as well. There, GP readers will recall, Jack Thompson pushed the agency into removing ads from Miami bus shelters.

Iraqi-born artist Wafaa Bilal's controversial video game exhibit, which culminates in the player attempting to shoot President Bush, has triggered a lawsuit against the city of Troy, New York, according to the Albany Times-Union.

As GamePolitics readers may recall, Bilal, a faculty member at the Art Institute of Chicago, was invited to present his Virtual Jihadi exhibit at Rensselaer Polytechnical Institute in March.

RPI's Republican Club, however, objected to Virtual Jihadi, which Bilal said was designed to show how US policy in Iraq has encouraged terrorism. School officials subsequently ordered the exhibit off campus. A local venue, the Sanctuary for Independent Media in Troy, then offered Bilal the opportunity to display his work.

On opening night local Republican leader Robert Mirch, who also happens to be Troy's Public Works commissioner, led a protest outside the exhibit. The following day, Troy code enforcement officials (who work for Mirch) shut the Sanctuary down over building code violations involving its doors.

The Sanctuary, assisted by the New York Civil Liberties Union, has notified Troy that it will file a lawsuit against the city as well as Mirch. Said Melanie Trimble executive director of NYCLU's Capital Region chapter:

City officials cannot selectively enforce building codes to shut down an art exhibition they find distasteful... City officials cannot chill free speech in this city by using their official powers.

Bob Mirch is the head of Public Works which oversees the code enforcement. Code enforcement came the next day and shut the building down even though they had approved the building's opening the day before. It's no coincidence.

Sanctuary co-founder Steve Pierce added:

There is a climate of fear in the city.

For his part, Mirch said:

This is nonsense. And a publicity stunt. At no time was the sanctuary closed. The two situations are not connected. Not connected.

Capital News 9 has a video report.

While public transit agencies in Chicago and Miami have pulled ads for Grand Theft Auto IV, it looks as if GP's local bus company will permit the ads to stay.

According to a report by all-news radio station KYW-1060, the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transit Authority (SEPTA) won't bow to (unspecified) pressure to remove the ads. From the KYW story:

SEPTA... is standing firm in its decision run the ads on hundreds of its buses...

SEPTA officials would not be interviewed, but they issued a statement saying while some might consider the game offensive, "the advertisement is not."

The ad campaign is slated to run for six weeks, with 350 posters on buses and other locations, generating $83,000 in revenue for SEPTA.

SEPTA last year was criticized for accepting ads for the movie "Hitman," ads featuring images of guns.

GP: It's not yet clear how SEPTA came to deal with the GTA IV ad issue. However, after I posted a picture of a SEPTA bus carrying a GTA IV ad last Friday, Jack Thompson, who was then in the process of persuading Miami-Dade Transit to drop its GTA IV ads, indicated he would pressure SEPTA to take a similar course of action.

In any case, if Thompson did try with SEPTA, he failed. GP has a call into SEPTA management for more details. In the meantime, it's good to see SEPTA standing firm on this issue. There are obvious First Amendment implications and, hey, SEPTA is strapped for cash. As a regional taxpayer, I'm happy to see that $83,000 in revenue coming in.

Ars Technica has a report on Jack Thompson's claim that the sexual content in Grand Theft Auto IV is essentially pornographic.

As is his custom, Thompson once again invokes law enforcement by writing to his local US Attorney about the game's hooker and strip club scenes:

Indictments should be returned against Take Two corporately and its Chairman, Strauss Zelnick, along with other Take Two officers. Indictment should also be against Sony and Microsoft which are making this pornographic game available to minors, and openly so, on their PS3 and Xbox systems.

Further, indictments should be handed down against Wal-Mart, Best Buy, GameStop, and all other retailers distributing this game to minors at their retail stores, openly, to kids who are only seventeen.

So, lock everyone up, then? Are the feds even talking to Thompson yet? The controversial attorney's rant continues:

Grand Theft Auto IV is the gravest assault upon children in this country since polio.

Since polio...

While Ars Technica concludes that an IGN video (NSFW) which rolls a number of the game's sex scenes into one segment gives Thompson ammunition, we're not so sure.

For one thing, these are animations, not real people. But even so, protagonist Niko Bellic's encounters with hookers in cars (notably unsexy pic at left) and strippers in clubs are all simulated; no genitalia are visible. The participants do not even appear to be unclothed. We've seen more graphic content in any number of R-rated films.

What's more, the ESRB content descriptors for GTA IV list "strong sexual content" and "partial nudity." We're quite sure that, given the industry-rocking 2005 Hot Coffee scandal, both Take Two and the ESRB had their legal experts closely review GTA IV's sex scenes.

Will Thompson get some publicity mileage from GTA IV's sex scenes? Sure. Will anything come of it?

No.