While Internet filtering went live for some New Zealand web surfers in February, the enactment was only recently announced to the general public.

The filtering technology is currently in use by two New Zealand ISPs, Maxnet and Watchdog reports ComputerWorld. Tech Liberty, a New Zealand-based digital rights group expects that the ISPs Telstra Clear, Telecom and Vodafone will also add the filter in the future, while Orcon, Slingshot and Natcom have expressed no desire to add the Internet sieve.

South Australian Attorney General Michael Atkinson, who has no problem casting verbal stones at his political opponents, is apparently unable to weather similar volleys lobbed at himself.

Atkinson is up in arms over a December 8, 2009 story that appeared on the website AdelaideNow which reported on a gathering of motorcycle club members.  In a resulting user comment on the story, someone referred to the South Australian AG as a “crook.” The comment (#86) was quickly removed from the story and two apologies were issued.

The commenter in question, Dean McQuillan, used his real name in his post and has subsequently received a letter from Atkinson’s lawyers alleging that the comment was “highly defamatory” towards Atkinson. The AG’s lawyers requested $20,000 as compensation and the “publication of a full retraction and apology.”

McQuillan told ABC’s MediaWatch that he is bankrupt and replied to Atkinson’s lawyers with a “robust response,” but has heard nothing since.

MediaWatch offered its own take on the situation:

The state's chief law officer is prepared to threaten an ordinary citizen with ruin for posting rude remarks on the net, even when they were taken down within a couple of hours.

Again, this is a man (Atkinson) who said that he expected his political opposition from the  Gamers4Croydon party to utilize ”criminal activities and dirty tricks” in their campaign against him.

Atkinson also tried to suppress online comments earlier this year in advance of the coming elections by introducing a law that would force users to publish their real name and post code alongside their comments.  A civil outcry forced  him to repeal the measure.

|Via Games.On.net|

Thanks SeanB and PHC Corp

A story on GameSpot features the opinions of Electronic Arts and Aliens vs. Predator developer Rebellion as related to the R18+ videogame rating discussion ongoing in Australia.

The Aliens vs. Predator game was originally Refused Classification by The Classification Board before successfully winning an appeal and an MA15+ rating. Rebellion producer Paul Mackman spoke to GameSpot about Rebellion’s position that it would not modify the game to appease censors:

This was important to us and something Sega agreed with, and I think they handled the appeal process very well. It reached a successful result and you guys get to play the game and that's the important thing. The politics aside, [it’s] really not for me to comment on.

Mackman indicated that keeping the game true to the film source was Rebellion’s top priority, “…it's fair to say these are fiendish monsters from outer space and they do commit violent acts. Those are all represented in the films, so I don't think we would be true to the licence if we didn't portray that.”

Electronic Arts, who most recently clashed with the rating board over Left 4 Dead 2, provided a statement on their backing of an R18+ rating category:

Government policies that refuse to rate mature content effectively censor the content that adult players want to play. This shows a poor understanding of exactly who plays interactive games in Australia. The spectrum of gamers is as wide as the viewership of television, movies, theatre, and the readers of books.

A government policy that keeps our games out of stores and forces developers to rewrite code is censorship. Age rating systems are designed to help people make appropriate content choices for the right age groups.

In a related article, GameSpot notes that both the Australian Sex Party and the Pirate Party Australia have thrown their weight behind the introduction of an R18+ videogame rating category, while more traditional parties, such as the Greens and The Federal Coalition, have adopted a wait and see attitude.

Greens Senator Scott Ludlam did offer his take on South Australian Attorney general Michael Atkinson however:

I think the position he took to block the rest of the country from moving forward was really unhelpful, and I don’t think he necessarily provided the arguments to back up the position he took.

Thanks Ryan!

Lawmakers in France have approved the draft of a law that would enable ISP-level Internet filtering.

Dubbed the Loppsi II bill, the measure passed a National Assembly vote in a count of 312 to 214 reports the Good Gear Guide. The bill will next be read in the Senate, which could be its final reading if no amendments are introduced, as the government has pinned an “urgent” tag on the bill.

Among the bill’s Internet measures are provisions to make online identity theft a crime and allow police to tap Net connections, in addition to allowing authorities to order ISPs to filter Internet connections to remove child pornography materials.

Critics of the bill are concerned that any Internet filtering could lead to more widespread government induced censorship online.

Other parts of the bill deal with “boosting the amount the police spend on ‘security,’ multiplying penalties for counterfeiting checks or credit cards, increasing use of CCTV cameras, extending access to the police national DNA database and authorizing the seizure of vehicles driven without a license.”

It’s estimated that the filtering technology would cost France €140 million (approximately $190.0 million U.S.)and would be “largely ineffective” against the distribution of child pornography, which experts say is done via P2P networks.

A Draconian South Australian law aimed at limiting online comments about the upcoming elections inflamed much of the population, resulting in an apparent repeal of the law.

The law in question came into effect on January 6 and sought to require any online user commenting on the March 20th state elections in South Australia to publish their real name and post code alongside their comments. According to Adelaide Now, a definite target of South Australian Attorney General Michael Atkinson, the law would have applied to comments posted to online news stories, as well any comment made on the election on social sites such as Twitter and Facebook.

The law was not scheduled to be enforced until writs for the March 20th election were issued. The writs could be issued anytime between now and 25 days before the election. The law was to expire at 6:00 PM on election day. An additional aspect of the law would have forced media companies to store commenter’s names and post codes for six months. They could have faced fines of $5,000AU if the information collected was not handed over to the Electoral Commissioner.

Atkinson said the law was all about “honesty,” adding that, “There is no impinging on freedom of speech, people are free to say what they wish as themselves, not as somebody else.” 

Specifically Atkinson also labeled the Adelaide Now website, “…a sewer of criminal defamation, it is a sewer of identity theft and fraud.”

It appears that an outraged populace has forced Atkinson’s hands for once, as new information coming out of South Australia indicates that Atkinson will repeal the law.

Adelaide Now reports that Atkinson stated, “I will immediately after the election move to repeal the law retrospectively.” 

He added, “It may be humiliating for me, but that's politics in a democracy and I'll take my lumps.”
While repealing the law after the elections would indicate that the law is still in place, Atkinson said it would not be enforced.

It’s important to note, and a little frightening, that the soon-to-be-repealed law was also supported by the Liberal Party, the main opposition to Atkinson’s Labor Party.

Thanks to readers iheartassassinmaid, Ryan and Anders for sending this story in.

The campaign to add an R18+ videogame rating category in Australia has gained an additional foe—the Australian Christian Lobby.

The group’s policy website features a section on the game ratings debate, in which the idea that an adult videogame rating category is needed Down Under is sharply rebuked:

The potential for violent and sexually explicit interactive games to cause harm has only increased in recent years as these games have become even more sophisticated, graphic and interactive. It is also naive to think that R18+ games could be restricted to adult users. If these games are allowed to go on sale in Australia they will inevitably find their way into the hands of younger players through older siblings or friends.

If anything, the current system should be tightened, the group writes:

If any changes are to be made to the classification system it should only be to resolve to tighten up the MA15+ rating to ensure that games aren’t wrongly getting through in this category.

The group encourages website visitors to attempt to stop the introduction of an R18+ category by writing a submission to the government in advance of the February 28th deadline for responses to the Discussion Paper.

Australia still does not have an R18+ rating category for videogames and now the R18+ category for movies has undergone a severe transformation in South Australia.

South Australia is, of course, home base for anti-game Attorney General Michael Atkinson, so it may not be a total surprise that a new law, which limits how R18+ rated movies can be displayed, exhibited and promoted in South Australia, came into effect on January 10.

A PDF detailing the new law is on the government of South Australia’s website. In it are instructions for handling R18+ rated movies, which applies to any establishment (other than adult-only) that sells, displays or rents movies with ratings below the R18+ threshold. Obviously the idea is to “shield” R18+ movies from those who might be shopping for lower rated films.

Among the law’s provisions:

• The material for an R18+ film must be displayed in a different area from that in which material for other films is displayed.  The different area must be marked with a prescribed notice displayed in a prominent place near the area. i.e. R 18+ FILMS AREA—THE PUBLIC ARE WARNED THAT MATERIAL DISPLAYED IN THIS AREA MAY CAUSE OFFENCE.

• The displayed material for an R18+ film may bear no images or markings other than the name of the film in letters of 10 millimetres or less in height and the determined markings relevant to the film’s classification.

Penalties for non-compliance call for a maximum fine of up to $5,000A.

What’s perhaps more disheartening than even the law itself is the reaction from retailers and distributors  who seemed to have no inkling that the law even existed.

Speaking to The Australian, film distributor Mark Spratt of Potential Films said he was “gobsmacked” by news of the law, adding, “It's gone completely under the radar.”


|Via Gizmodo, Thanks Grant!|

Fears over a God of War III banning in Australia can be put to rest as the title has received a MA15+ rating from the Classification Board, effectively clearing it for release.

GameSpot had word on the title’s rating, noting that content descriptors on the game’s packaging will cite “Strong violence, sexual references and nudity” as being part of the game.

In light of Australia’s lack of an R18+ rating, God of War III’s developers had been sweating out whether or not the game would be deemed suitable for release.

Additionally, a God of War III: Ultimate Edition will be offered for sale in Australia for the price of A$248.00.


Thanks Ryan!

The United Arab Emirates has banned THQ’s game Darksiders reports gaming site GamesLatest.

The site notes that such bannings are not usually accompanied by a detailed explanation; instead an explanation typically offered is that a forbidden commodity “contradicts with UAE’s customs and traditions.”

The game, developed by Vigil games for the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360, involves demons and has players take the role of War, one of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.

In the game’s setting, War is accused of breaking a scared law and “inciting a war between Heaven and Hell.” Following a battle between demons and angels that the demons win, War is “brought before the sacred Charred Council” and indicted for his crimes and has his other worldly powers removed. While being hunted by Angels, War returns to Earth in order to search for the truth, to find those responsible for deceiving him and to battle the forces of Hell.

God of War and Grand Theft Auto IV were also banned in the UAE in recent years.

A new downloadable game lets players assume the role of Australian politicians and bring the ban hammer down on videogames and websites.

Ban This Game features likenesses of South Australian Attorney General Michael Atkinson and Stephen Conroy, Minister for Broadband and Communication, who is the man championing ISP filtering for Australia. Gameplay consists of images of games and websites crossing a red line. Players must click on an image three times to ban it once it passes over said line. Windows and Mac versions are available.

The game is the work of game developer Conor O’Kane. The embedded video shows the game in action. A Facebook Fan Page for the game has been set up as well.

Thanks Ryan and Michael!

While most viewed the Australian government’s decision to accept public comments on adding an adult R18+ rating category for videogames as a positive step forward, one columnist labeled the announcement as “purely smoke and mirrors.”

Duncan Riley of The Inquisitr called the government’s timing for the release of the paper suspect, claiming that it was merely a way to distract Australians from the government’s new plan to censor the Internet, which was announced just a few days later.

Other hurdles to the eventual implementation include the fact that any change to current censorship laws must be supported by all states. Riley adds:

States could in theory still go it alone on censorship, but likewise none seems interested in going it alone on computer games; that is, the states are committed to the process of a national implementation of censorship laws, complete with the need for all states to agree to changes.

Another road block is, of course, South Australia Attorney General Michael Atkinson:

Atkinson isn’t a one-man band on censorship, his stance against R18+ games is not his alone, but comes with the support of the South Australian Government. If he was running policy that went against the beliefs of the Government, he wouldn’t continue to hold his position of Attorney General.

|Thanks Ryan|

A new title from 2K Games set in a post-apocolyptic Dubai has officials in the United Arab Emirates a bit antsy in light of the latest financial crisis in the middle eastern city state.

The game, Spec Ops: The Line, follows a group of special forces troops sent on a rescue mission to Dubai after it is destroyed in a sandstorm of cataclysmic proportions. According to an article in The National, the idea for the game was decided long before Dubai's troubles:

"It's such a fantastic location from an architectural standpoint," said [the game's producer Greg] Kasavin. "The contrast between the exterior devastation and the interior opulence and beautiful architecture seemed to be a really beautiful and effective image."

But seeing one of their most prominent cities in ruins has UAE officials a bit wary:

"We will have to review the game first before issuing any decision on whether to ban it or allow it," said Mohammed al Mutawa, a video-games censor at the [UAE's National Media Council].

Apparently, Kasavin and the development team are taking great pains to make sure the game does not step on any religious or political toes, but the game's description does hint to something ominous as the characters dig deeper into the story.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

GP: In a related story (only in the realm of major cities being destroyed), the new Army of Two game has Shanghai being destroyed by terrorists. No word from the Chinese censors on this one yet, as they seem to be focusing social games and MMOs at the moment. But we're sure this will be in the news again at a later date.

Just after taking the positive step of opening discussion on the possible inclusion of an R18+ videogame ratings category, Australia is getting ready to implement mandatory Internet Service Provider (ISP) level Internet filtering.

ITNews reports that Australia plans to amend its Broadcasting Services Act next August in order to implement the changes, which are designed to block content that falls under the Refused Classification (RC) category on non-Australian servers.

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy (pictured), a backer of the plan, said that, “Most Australians acknowledge that there is some internet content which is not acceptable in any civilised society".

Australia commissioned a pilot program test of the filtering, conducted by Enex TestLab, on nine live (active) ISP networks. Three ISPs used an Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) blacklist, two used Deep Packet Inspection monitoring technology, while another used proxy filtering technology.  All participants were 100% effective in blocking sites on the ACMA blacklist. Non-AMCA blacklist filtering was between 78% and 84% percent accurate.

From a report (PDF) on the pilot program:

A small number of customers indicated they experienced some over-blocking and/or
under-blocking of content during the pilot. A small number of customers also reported
slower network speeds as a result of the service which filtered additional categories of
content.

Electronic Frontiers Australia (EFA) spokesman Colin Jacobs was not impressed with the news, calling the government’s posture that is simply blocking child pornography rubbish, “Refused classification is definitely more than just illegal child pornography.”

He continued:

It's anything that doesn't fit into the Classification Board's other ratings and that include video games aimed at adults, criminality and euthanasia and all sorts of controversial things. Our concern is that once there is a secret blacklist in place it is going to be very difficult for the public to know what's on it and if it will be increased in scope as time goes on.

A list purported to be the actual ACMA blacklist can be viewed on Wikileaks. Released on March 18, 2009, the list contains 2,395 URLs.


|Thanks CMiner|

The cringe-inducing video featuring Kurt Cobain’s Guitar Hero 5 avatar performing songs from the likes of Bon Jovi, Bush and Public Enemy has been taken off of YouTube due to a copyright claim from Activision.

The user who posted the video has had his account disabled as well reports Kotaku. corporalgregg3 wrote,  “Yeah, my last account was permanently disabled due to (I think) Activision. Right before my account was shut down, the Kurt Cobain vid was removed due to copyright claim by Activision Games Inc.”

Cobain’s widow Courtney Love had threatened to “sue the shit” out of Activision over his use in the game before Activision responded with a claim to have a signed document from Love for just such use. Unfortunately (fortunately?) Love’s main means of communicating, her Twitter account, has been deactivated.

Chinese officials have launched a new initiative designed to rid the country’s Internet of illegal games featuring content deemed inappropriate (by the government) for its citizens.

Yahoo reports that 45 online games have been shut down so far, some of which had players partake in games with illegal activity such as selling drugs or peddling hookers. 200 games in all were investigated according to the report, with some given time to eliminate or change any illegal aspects.

The campaign was launched in conjunction with the 60th anniversary of the founding of communist China on October 1.

Earlier this year the Chinese government targeted games featuring organized crime.

While Venezuela has been the (unwilling) setting for at least one violent video game (Mercenaries 2: World in Flames), lawmakers there are moving ahead with plans to ban violent games and toys.

The effort, reports Reuters, is aimed at reducing an unprecedented wave of crime and violence. According to Reuters, dozens of people are murdered in the Venezuelan capital of Caracas every week.

A measure detailing the proposed ban passed Venezuela's National Assembly this week. In order to become law, the game ban bill would need to be voted on a second time and then signed into law by President Hugo Chavez.

If passed, the video game ban would not be the first time that the Venezuelan government has targeted a form of media in response to social issues. In 2008 the government banned The Simpsons as unsuitable for children.

The popular, World War II-themed RTS Company of Heroes is shortly to enter the Chinese game market as Company of Heroes Online, reports Kotaku.

When it does, all references to Nazi Germany will have been purged. The German side will be renamed "The Federation," while iron cross symbols on German vehicles and buildings will also be changed.

In recent times, Germany has become Ground Zero in the debate over video game violence.

Consider that the German Parliament is expected to consider a total ban on the production and distribution of violent games next month. Meanwhile, top-tier developer Crytek (Far Cry, Crysis) has threatened to relocate out of the country if the ban becomes law.

In the latest development, EA exec Gerhard Florin (left) has called for Germany to drop its USK content rating system in favor of the PEGI system, which is widely in use in other European nations. Said Florin:

What we're doing here [with USK rating] is censorship. And no one complains. When we talk about games here it's about violence or their alleged addictiveness, and not about their cultural status. The few good studios are asking themselves why they should stay here anyway.

USK boss Marek Brunner took issue with Florin's criticism:

It's hard when half-truths are being used. They say the USK does this wrong, the USK does that bad and why doesn't this get a rating?

Brunner noted that other government bodies influence the type of game content which can be sold, including the Federal Department for Media Harmful to Young Persons and the criminal courts.

Via: gamesindustry.biz

The Associated Press reports that the Entertainment Software Association, which represents the interests of U.S. video game publishers, spent $1.2 million on government lobbying efforts during the period April-June, 2009.

Looking beneath the surface, GamePolitics has obtained an actual copy of the ESA's latest federal lobbying report. The document shows that Big Gaming has its fingers in a surprising number of legislative and governmental pies. The following are issues which the ESA reports that it lobbied on in Q2:

• Media regulation
• First Amendment protection
• Entertainment industry ratings
• Parental control technology
• Content/video game sale regulation
• Retailer enforcement of ratings
• Piracy
• Copyright Act (believed to be the DMCA)
• Anti-circumvention
• Patent modernization
• Intellectual property enforcement
• Customs reauthorization
• PRO-IP Act appropriations
• Dept. of Justice appropriations
• Dept. of State reauthorization
• Free Trade Agreements
• Special 301 Designated Countries
• Trade Policy Reform
• Domestic regulatory & administrative issues
• Trade enforcement
• Doha Round Proceedings (trade talks)
• Trade Promotion Authority
• Internet Governance
• Virtual worlds
• Online gaming
• Highly skilled workforce
• H1-B visas
• Green cards
• Immigration reform
• ISP management
• Copyright Enforcement
• Broadband deployment
• Broadband policy
• Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act implementation

Agencies lobbied by the ESA include some surprising entities. Here's the list:

• U.S. House of Representatives
• U.S. Senate
• Federal Communications Commission
• Federal Trade Commission
• National Telecommunications & Information Administration
• U.S. Copyright Office
• U.S. Customs & Border Protection
• U.S. Trade Representative
• Department of Commerce
• Department of Homeland Security
• Department of Justice
• Patent & Trademark Office
• FBI
• National Security Council

DOCUMENT DUMP: Grab your own copy of the ESA's lobbying report... (9-page PDF)

Video game publishers could gain direct access to the massive Chinese market following a ruling by the World Trade Organization that China may not invoke culture-based censorship to block foreign media imports such as books, games and movies.

According to Reuters, the WTO ruling came in response to an April, 2007 complaint filed by the United States:

The WTO ruling could potentially affect how foreign video game companies operate in China.

U.S. video game titans such as Electronic Arts, Activision Blizzard and Take Two Interactive, are not allowed to operate games directly in China, or through joint ventures with local firms. They instead license games to local operators or co-develop games with local firms.

But the WTO ruling was unlikely to overcome China's determination to govern the virtual landscape, said Dick Wei, vice president of equity research with JP Morgan in Hong Kong.

Yesterday, GamePolitics reported on Risen, the latest game to fall victim to Australia's outdated content rating system. The RPG, currently in development by Piranha Bytes, was refused classification for the Australian market, largely because Down Under lacks the equivalent of the ESRB's M (17+) rating.

The situation frustrates Tom Crago, who heads the Game Developers Association of Australia. Crago spoke to itwire about his concerns:

Well it’s a joke isn’t it?  We are once again caught in this awful, ridiculous web of the antiquated classification system...  Here in Australia the sooner that changes, the better; it is obviously a battle to ensure common sense prevails.  We will get there eventually, but in the meantime as gamers in Australia we suffer, and to be honest we are embarrassed at how backward our government is...

The biggest problem we have here in Australia is that we don’t have an R classification for video games...  It’s ridiculous because it assumes that games are fundamentally different to film and outrageous in that it assumes that adults shouldn’t be allowed to access adult content in video games... 

We are the butt of a lot of jokes; I travel, obviously a lot, talking to other developers and publishers and people cannot believe it that we still have this ridiculous system here in Australia, designed twenty or thirty years ago, and hasn’t changed since...

[South Australian Attorney General Michael Atkinson] is of course the problem... clearly this is a guy that doesn’t get it, and to be honest, I don’t think, ever will get it...

The upcoming role-playing game Risen has become the latest victim of Australia's flawed game content rating system.

Refused Classification reports that Australia's classification board has declined to assign a rating to the game, which is being developed by Piranha Bytes. The board's action makes Risen the third game of 2009 to be RC'd Down Under; the others are 1C's first-person shooter Necrovision and something called Sexy Poker.

In the U.S. market, Risen has been rated M (17+) by the ESRB. Australia, however, has no rating higher than MA15+, which means that any title judged not suitable for a 15-year-old is effectively banned. Australian gamers have been lobbying their government unsuccessfully for an R18+ rating for several years.

The classification refusal might not be the final word, however. Risen could be edited by its creators enough to slip by Australian censors. This approach has worked for other games, most recently Necrovision.

Risen is scheduled for October release on Xbox 360 and PC. The website R18+ is a useful source for information about the ongoing Australian content rating debate.

Far Cry and Crysis developer Crytek has renewed threats to leave Germany if a proposed ban on violent video games is passed. As GamePolitics noted in June, the recommendation by German interior ministers would impose a total ban on the production and distribution of violent games.

Edge Online has comment from Crytek CEO Cevat Yerli (left) on what the unprecedented government action would mean for his company:

A ban on action games in Germany is concerning us because it is essentially like banning the German artists that create them. If the German creative community can't effectively participate in one of the most important cultural mediums of our future, we will be forced to relocate to other countries.

The current political discussion will deprive German talent of its place on the global game development stage, and deprive German consumers of entertainment that is considered safe and fun around the world.

How extreme is the anti-game sentiment in certain quarters of the German government? So extreme that in 2004, a SWAT team raided Crytek's offices. Crytek developer Tim Partlett described the scene:

In 2004 the Bavarian authorities sent in the state troopers... When the small tech team appeared to inspect our computers, they were accompanied by over one hundred flak-jacketed riot police, all armed with Heckler and Koch sub-machine guns.

It was a total overreaction... They arrived first thing in the morning, and kicked down our doors. They even raided the nearby private residences...

I was caught just outside the office...  We were all shepherded into our Mo-Cap room, and there we were forced to remain until questioned, prevented from leaving by dozens of armed guards...

More than 60,000 Germans have signed a petition against the ban, triggering a mandatory government review of the proposal.

The government of China has implemented a crackdown against online games which feature organized crime themes, reports the New York Times: 

On Monday, the Ministry of Culture issued a notice banning online games that feature Mafioso kingpins, marauding street gangs or any sort of hooliganism predisposed to organization.

The decree, which promises “severe punishment” for violators but fails to specify the penalties, also prohibits Web sites from including links to Internet games that glorify organized crime.

Such games, the ministry said, “embody antisocial behavior like killing, beating, looting and raping,” and their availability “gravely threatens and distorts the social order and moral standards, easily putting young people under harmful influence.”

 As GamePolitics has reported, video games are a frequent target of Chinese government scrutiny.

So far, every single law seeking to restrict the sale of violent video games has been struck down by the federal courts; it would seem that such legislation is a losing proposition.  So how else might the government try to regulate our favorite pastime?  Writing for Joystiq, lawyer and gamer Mark Methenitis offers two possible scenarios which censorcrats might seek to employ.

The first is to impose content restrictions - not on the type of violence that can be shown but on the type of stories that can be told or the types of characters presented. The idea here would be to ensure that games are politically correct so as not to offend anyone and prevent flaps over perceived racism in games like Resident Evil 5, Left 4 Dead 2, or Call of Juarez: Bound in Blood.  Of course, this still boils down to regulating speech so it’s not likely to be any more successful in the courts than restricting violent content has been.

The second is an idea presented by Jack Thompson during his debate with Methenitis at SGC09 earlier this month. Thompson speculated that the Obama administration might address America’s obesity issues by regulating our play time. But how? The government can’t just march into your home and turn off your Xbox. While there is no indication that Obama is planning any such thing, Methenitis explains how such a scenario might work:

When the government wants you to stop doing something, they tax it. Alcohol is taxed. Tobacco is taxed. Certain kinds of less-fuel efficient cars are taxed. In short, the theory is "fewer people buy things at a higher cost." And it's something that can be levied against both retail sales and digital downloads.

Taxing games is not a new idea but with the economy the way it is, now seems like the absolute worst time to try it.  Still, you never know. Methenitis:

It's always difficult to predict what the government may or may not do, or how the courts may or may not rule. The system, however, relies on the vigilance of the public to ensure that our rights are not infringed....

-Reporting from San Diego, GamePolitics Correspondent Andrew Eisen...

In the latest edition of his Soapbox, G4's Adam Sessler expresses the view that video game censorship is pretty much gone, but that gamers should be watchful for its return.

GP: Here at GamePolitics, we're waiting for the U.S. Supreme Court to rule in the California case later this year. At that point, we'll have a better handle on where the game censorship issue is heading.

Sometime this fall, the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to review California's appeal of lower court rulings striking down its 2005 violent video game law as unconstitutional. Yesterday, the video game industry submitted its position to the Court.

In a 41-page brief compiled by attorney Paul Smith of Jenner & Block, the game industry relies heavily on precedents set by a history of failed attempts by state and local governments to impose age-based restrictions on video games. Indeed, the game biz has never lost such a case and Smith has been their successful point man for many years. From the brief:

Despite [California's] efforts to conjure up some argument for review of the Ninth Circuit’s decision, in reality the decision is a routine application of established First Amendment principles to a content-based ban on protected expression.

Petitioners offer no persuasive reason for the Court to review this ruling. There is no split of
[past decisions] on the questions presented. To the contrary, the lower courts are unanimous as to the constitutionality of bans on distribution of violent video games. That is unsurprising...

California was not the first state to try to restrict distribution of video games it considered too violent for minors. Such laws have proved politically popular, but every one has been struck down under the First Amendment...

Smith and his fellow attorney also dig into California's assertion that children should be legally shielded from violent video games as they are from obscenity. California's causation arguments, which attempt to link violent video games to violent behavior, are also taken to task.

DOCUMENT DUMP: Grab a copy of the game industry brief here (41-page PDF)...

As GamePolitics and other news outlets have reported, the ESA is suing the Chicago Transit Authority over the agency's ban on M and AO-rated video ads.

Here are excerpts from the justification section of CTA Ordinace 008-147, the document at the heart of the ESA lawsuit:

WHEREAS... the Chicago Transit Board established advertising guidelines permitting certain advertising in or upon Chicago Transit Authority vehicles and facilities; and

 

WHEREAS, According to an August 2008 Chicago Sun Times article at least 36 Chicago public school students have been killed since September 2007; and

 

WHEREAS, There is a demonstrable correlation between intensely violent video or computer games and violent or aggressive behavior (see "Video Game Violence and Public Policy" by David Walsh, Ph.D. and "The Effects of Violent Video Game Habits on Adolescent Hostility, Aggressive Behaviors, and School Performance" by Gentile, Lynch, Linder and Walsh; and

 

WHEREAS, There is evidence that many of these violent video or computer games are marketed toward children under 17 years of age (see Federal Trade Commission study, September, 2000)...

The 2000 FTC report is, indeed, an indictment of video game industry marketing practices. On the other hand, the industry has made remarkable strides since then in restricting the access of minors to violent games.

In its May, 2008 report, the FTC found an 80% overall compliance rate in retail ratings enforcement, with top performer GameStop achieving a 94% compliance rate. Given that the CTA ordinance was passed in November, 2008, it's unclear why the 2000 data was used.

The full CTA ordinance may be found as "Exhibit 2" in the ESA's lawsuit. Click here for a copy of the 70-page PDF.

A spokeswoman for the Chicago Transit Authority has commented on the federal lawsuit filed against the agency's ban on M-rated video game ads yesterday by the Entertainment Software Association.

Kotaku reports:

Reached for comment... Wanda Taylor, a spokeswoman for the Chicago Transit Authority, told Kotaku that the authority has not yet been served with the suit but that they feels that the ordinance is defensible.

"The CTA does not allow advertising for alcohol or tobacco products and this ordinance is consistent with that long-standing policy," she said...

Taylor pointed out that they have a number of guidelines in place for determining if an advertisement can run on the CTA. The guidelines, she said, require ads to be truthful and not directed at inciting imminent lawless action. The ads cannot be legally obscene, sexually explicit, depict nudity or portray graphic violence nor can they incite lawless illegal action.

Never mind imposing tougher safety standards on imports from China, writes South Carolina attorney and activist Tom Turnipseed (left).

In an op-ed for The State, Turnipseed urges Inez Tenenbaum, the new chair of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, to make her first priority a ban on war toys and war games:

It’s easier for children to play with war toys than to learn how to read or play the piano. War toys teach children aggression. Aggression needs an outlet, but aggression can be played out in a non-violent manner with peaceful games.

Children should know what really happens in a war. People are hurt, maimed and killed. War toys, games, television shows and movies using guns seldom show the real effect of what violence does to people...

 

Studies indicate a direct correlation between exposure to media violence, especially interactive video games, and increased childhood aggression...

Better alternatives to children enjoying shooting at people and blowing up buildings are games that encourage the use of their minds, skills and physical dexterity in activities promoting the sanctity of life and peace.

Turnipseed served as a South Carolina state senator (D) from 1976 to1980. He made unsuccessful runs for Congress (1980) and South Carolina Attorney General (1998).