judge rules games protected by free speech

[CptStern]

huzzah major victory for our side:

Michigan Violent Games Law Thrown Out

http://biz.gamedaily.com/industry/feature/?id=12307&rp=49

Excellent news for Michigan gamers: the courts have thrown out as unconstitutional a recently passed bill that would have made selling certain games to minors illegal.

What really impresses us about the story is just how much common sense the judge, George Caram Steeh, seems to have. Here’s some quotes from his statements.

On the subject of whether or not the First Amendment applied to games: “The interactive, or functional aspect, in video games can be said to enhance the expressive elements even more than other media by drawing the player closer to the characters and becoming more involved in the plot of the game than by simply watching a movie or television show.” In other words, the First Amendment applies more to games, not less."

some of you may remember last week senate hearings on video games seeked to establish that video games are not protected by free speech because they are not expressions of individual creativity ..well this ruling in michigan will make it all that much tougher to use that tactic

 

[kaf11]

Huzzah indeed!

Great news, thanks for keeping us up to date.

 

[Sulkdodds]

Ha. And I was going to write a letter to Jack Thompson and others detailing how GTA was a satire of American society (total freedom but in actuality you're not truly free/walk in and buy a gun/climb to the top but **** everybody else/the police are harsh but as soon as you go down you (ie Crime) just come right back again) and thus protected by free speech laws. Oh well.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

Dr. (Craig) Anderson's studies have not provided any evidence that the relationship between violent video games and aggressive behavior exists... The research not only fails to provide concrete evidence that there is a connection between violent media and aggressive behavior, it also fails to distinguish between video games and other forms of media.

Oh snap!

 

[VirusType2]

/e celebrates

:micheal jackson dance:

:bounce:

Judge George Caram Steeh is now a video game industry god.

 

[Razor]

Shouldn't it be illegal though to sell extremely violent games to minors, i presume being the same as not alloying extremely violent movies to be shown to minors? If a game is rated M, or 18 or whatever, it should only be sold to customers who are of that age or older.

 

[CptStern]

yes but their solution is more akin to trying to kill a fruit fly with a rocket launcher ...this is much more than just targeting sales of violent games to minors ..that's their inroad to their final goal: government regulated rating systems ..which is completely unprecedented in any other media

 

[DeusExMachina]

I knew the Judge would rule it unconstitutional.

woot.

 

[Yuri]

First off, Stern, I wanna thank you for keeping us updated with this, its quite interesting and I'm too lazy to find this stuff out on my own.

And secondly, thanks for using quotes!

Extra Love! <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3

 

[CptStern]

hehe that was specifically for you, you know


I keep up with the news because I'm outraged there are people out there who would stuff their morality down our throats

 

[DeusExMachina]

I'm outraged people out there would think they could circumvent the constitution.

 

[CptStern]

they'll still try ...they need to if they want to censor violence in video games ..all they need is one state to allow it many more will follow suit

 

[Yuri]

hehe that was specifically for you, you know


I keep up with the news because I'm outraged there are people out there who would stuff their morality down our throats

Hehe <3

Yeah, Amerika: Home of the BELIEVE WHAT WE BELIEVE OR GET SHOT (tm)

 

[DeusExMachina]

The Democrats are really shooting themselves in the foot here. By election time, a lot of minor gamers will be old enough to vote and it honestly looks like the Dems are actually suggesting Clinton :|. I can only hope the Reps nominate Giuliani or McCain, or else I'll have no one to vote for.

 

[CptStern]

Hehe <3

Yeah, Amerika: Home of the BELIEVE WHAT WE BELIEVE OR GET SHOT (tm)

that's what perplexes me about the US...on the one hand there's a strict moral center ..on the other hand it's the other extreme where in some areas liberal (not the party) POVs are the norm. There's a strange dichotomy at work in the US ...get rid of the uber conservatives and all will be well again

 

[DeusExMachina]

that's what perplexes me about the US...on the one hand there's a strict moral center ..on the other hand it's the other extreme where in some areas liberal (not the party) POVs are the norm. There's a strange dichotomy at work in the US ...get rid of the uber conservatives and all will be well again

Well don't forget, reactionary conservatives and radical liberals are the minority in the two parties. Most of the people in America are your average Republican/Democrat/Independent. Unfortunately, with Bush's presidency, the uber conservatives have been able to rear their ugly heads.

 

[CptStern]

yes but minority rules in the US

 

[Qonfused]

Wait, what? In Michigan?! Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?!

I knew nothing of this.

 

[CptStern]

Wait, what? In Michigan?! Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?!

I knew nothing of this.

yes ..see:

http://www.gamepolitics.com/legislation.htm

 

[ríomhaire]

Stern, how do you raise a family if you're on these bloody news sites all day :cheers:

 

[el Chi]

I'm astounded that this wasn't a complete no-brainer. Of course it's an expression of free speech.
I presume the idea of games "not [being] expressions of individual creativity" was due to the fact that they are created by teams of people?
Like certain academic books and compendiums, that sort of thing?
Call me cynical, but I reckon if there was a book, co-written by three people, that was horrifically partisan to conservatives (for example) they probably wouldn't go after it.
Finally, the fact that they had to use such an extreme means to try and castigate gaming shows how desperate they truly are.

Ha. And I was going to write a letter to Jack Thompson and others detailing how GTA was a satire of American society (total freedom but in actuality you're not truly free/walk in and buy a gun/climb to the top but **** everybody else/the police are harsh but as soon as you go down you (ie Crime) just come right back again) and thus protected by free speech laws. Oh well.

There's no point in writing a coherent, well-written - and most importantly - sane letter to Thompson. It'll merely frighten him - after all: you might have a point! :O
You certainly won't get a reply.
Which is a shame, because it'd be interesting to see if he could defend himself past misguided rhetoric and downright laughable attempts at "satire".

 

[CptStern]

I think this sums it up fairly well:


from shacknews:

"One of the arguments frequently used by gaming's detractors is that the interactive nature of video games makes them less eligible to be protected as expression, since much of what happens from the player's end is controlled by the player rather than depicting the expression of a designer. [Judge] Steeh disagrees, drawing an important connection between the interactivity of a game and its expressive capability:

The interactive, or functional aspect, in video games can be said to enhance the expressive elements even more than other media by drawing the player closer to the characters and becoming more involved in the plot of the game than by simply watching a movie or television show. It would be impossible to separate the functional aspects of a video game from the expressive, inasmuch as they are so closely intertwined and dependent on each other in creating the virtual experience.

"Detractors also claim that the interactivity of games reinforces potentially violent behavior players may be learning from what is being shown on screen. While this may be the case, there has yet to be widely accepted research indicating as such. In fact, Streeh notes, that very element of games may be having precisely the opposite effect:"

The defendants do argue that video games are a 'unique' form of screen-based media because the player actually controls the violent action as opposed to passively observing these actions, but present no scientific evidence to back up this claim. Without such evidence... it could just as easily be said that the interactive element in video games acts as an outlet for minors to vent their violent or aggressive behavior, thereby diminishing the chance they would actually perform such acts in reality.

"The bottom line, according to Steeh, is that games "contain original artwork, graphics, music, storylines, and characters similar to movies and television shows, both of which are considered protected free speech." Research has also "failed to prove that video games have ever caused anyone to commit a violent act, let alone present a danger of imminent violence." It is likely that excerpts from Steeh's 17-page ruling will be used in future game-related legal matters, such as the GTA-inspired-murder lawsuit that was recently allowed to continue."


http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/41546

Stern, how do you raise a family if you're on these bloody news sites all day :cheers:

everything you need to know at a glance, quick, easy, no searching

http://www.gametab.com


this post took me about 4 minutes to write (although I edited a number of times )

 

[el Chi]

I <3 Judge Steeh
Not only is he very sensible, I really liked the way he put things in those included quotes. Splendid stuff.

 

[CptStern]

he really did set a precedent because in future cases of the same nature they'll be able to use his ruling as an example. The jack thompsons of the world took a major beating with this one ..but it wont stop them

 

[el Chi]

Of course it won't, but hopefully his ruling will sway some fence-sitters, etc.

 

[DeusExMachina]

Well Judges are for the most part fair. Throughout our history, our Judges have been strict with following the constitution. Even with things they personally might disagree with, they'll vote by what the constitution says. Or, they'll simply back out without going on either side.

 

[CptStern]

that remains to be seen on the abortion issue ..it's headed for the supreme court

 

[DeusExMachina]

I doubt it'll be overturned. Everyone thinks Alito's going to be the deciding vote, but our Supreme Court justices know what they're doing. Look back at Eisenhower's presidency. I forget who he exactly appointed, but he thought he appointed a staunch conservative to the court. The judge ended up deciding on liberal cases. Eisenhower said it was the only decision he regrets.

 

[CptStern]

I doubt it'll be overturned. Everyone thinks Alito's going to be the deciding vote, but our Supreme Court justices know what they're doing. Look back at Eisenhower's presidency. I forget who he exactly appointed, but he thought he appointed a staunch conservative to the court. The judge ended up deciding on liberal cases. Eisenhower said it was the only decision he regrets.

I dont know ...look at this map of abortion ban

http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/cho.../who-decides/maps-and-charts/map.jsp?mapID=16


compare it with pro-choice legislation:

http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/cho.../who-decides/maps-and-charts/map.jsp?mapID=23


a lot of states have introduced or are planning to introduce legislation that either bans abortion outright or curtails it ...this is pretty organised and it's a move by pro-life movements for the big spearhead push to the supreme court specifically roe vs wade

 

[>>FrEnZy<<]

damn. The only games that should be allowed are educational ones. Like civilization.

edit: that was a dumb point.

 

[Raziaar]

Woo ****ing hoo!

 

[Llama]

damn. The only games that should be allowed are educational ones. Like civilization.

edit: that was a dumb point.

...um, why? :|

 

[15357]

Free speech?


Not that I'm against games, but that seems the worst defense for it.

 

[gick]

Free speech?


Not that I'm against games, but that seems the worst defense for it.

Can you think of a better one? (not having a go or anything, just curious).

 

[15357]

Can you think of a better one? (not having a go or anything, just curious).

uh.... that uh.. games don't cause already mental people to go out and kill a dozen others?

 

[DeusExMachina]

uh.... that uh.. games don't cause already mental people to go out and kill a dozen others?

Books, movies, and music are protected under freedom of expression, so the argument is videogames do as well.