AB-1179
Latest
US Supreme Court to weigh California game law
[Laura Padgett] The US Supreme Court today announced that it will consider an appeal by California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger regarding the sale of violent video games to minors in the state. This marks the first time the federal court has been involved in a video game-related case. The California bill backed by the Schwarzenegger has seen many, many, many ups and downs over the course of its five-year life span, going from a fledgling bill just waiting for the right signature to a chronically reputed source of frustration for the head of state; and most recently failing in California's Ninth Circuit Court. But as the governor is known to do, he returned once again, fulfilling his promise to bring Assembly Bill 1179 to the highest US court, reports Reuters. Entertainment Software Association president and CEO Mike Gallagher commented in a press release on the Supreme Court's decision to see the case, called "Schwarzenegger v. Entertainment Merchants" (number 08-1448), saying, "Courts throughout the country have ruled consistently that content-based regulation of computer and video games is unconstitutional." He hopes that "the Court will reject California's invitation to break from these settled principles by treating depictions of violence, especially those in creative works, as unprotected by the First Amendment." If the appeal is overturned, the law would require more stringent labeling requirements of violent games sold in California, as well as the threat of a $1,000 fine for each game sold by a retailer to a minor illegally. Historically, US Supreme Court rulings have been used to set precedent for other cases. In so many words, should the appeal be overturned, the Court's ruling could affect similar court decisions in other states. The earliest the appeal would be seen is in the Supreme Court's next term, which begins in October.
California seeks US Supreme Court review of 'violent game ban' [update]
The state of California is asking the United States Supreme Court to review a US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision from February regarding its 2005 "violent video game law," declaring it unconstitutional under the First Amendment. According to GamePolitics. the law would require an additional warning label on games and slap retailers who sell violent games to minors with a $1,000 fine for each offense. California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who signed Assembly Bill 1179 into law, said of today's action, "By prohibiting the sale of violent video games to children under the age of 18 and requiring these games to be clearly labeled, this law would allow parents to make better informed decisions for their kids. I will continue to vigorously defend this law and protect the well-being of California's kids." Update: Entertainment Consumers Association president Hal Halpin has weighed in on California's plea to the Supreme Court. His comments can be found after the break.
California video game law fails again in Circuit Court
The 9th Circuit Court has affirmed that the California game law is not going to fly -- so, state tax payers better prepare to write the Entertainment Software Association another check. This latest appeal was pushed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger after a lower court had seemingly killed the law by placing a permanent injunction on it. ESA president Michael Gallagher believes this is a "win" for California's citizens, stating this is a "clear signal" that this type of "reckless" legislation is an "exercise in wasting taxpayer money, government time, and state resources." GamePolitics reports that Leland Yee (D) is pushing for California to appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court. Wonder how much money the ESA would get back from fighting that?
Governator says California game law will be back
Following yesterday's belief that the California game law had been terminated, comes word that Gov. Schwarzenegger isn't done protecting the bill's targeted youth. GamePolitics reports the governor's office sent out a press release that he will appeal the judge's ruling from yesterday which placed a permanent injunction on the bill. Schwarzenegger says, "I will vigorously defend this law and appeal it to the next level." If this thing is going to make a second pass, it might be time to take a quick refresher course on AB 1179. The bill would put another layer of California red tape on top of the ESRB's rating system. Any game deemed "violent" would have a big ol' 18 sticker on it and retailers would be fined $1000 for selling it to minors. Although this does sound perfectly reasonable, it essentially deems certain games on the level of porn and just irks First Amendment advocates. Also, let's not even open up the Pandora's box of irony that Arnold Schwarzenegger is the figurehead on this -- how many of you saw T2 for the first time underage in the theater?
California game law won't be back
The California game law which would have restricted anyone under the age of 18 from buying or renting "violent video games" has been effectively terminated. The bill, signed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger back in 2005, which was created by politician Leland Yee, had a preliminary injunction put on it while the ESA fought the bill in the courts. Today a judge made the injunction permanent. The bill follows in the long list of game laws found unconstitutional at this point. Yet, that still doesn't stop more states from attempting to recycle the tired legislation. According to Bo Andersen, president of the Entertainment Merchants Association, "It was inevitable that the federal district court would find the California video game restriction law unconstitutional, as eight similar laws around the country have been overturned in the past six years." Ready kids, here comes the fun part -- how much is California going to have to pay the ESA back for fighting the law? Politicians need to learn that when they push through unconstitutional laws, it's the taxpayer who pay -- literally.
ESA, VSDA file suit against California violent games law
As predicted last week (and, well, from the inception of the bill itself), the recently signed (and much reported) California violent video games law is about to be contested in court. The Entertainment Software Association, in conjunction with the Video Software Dealers Association, has filed a lawsuit claiming the new bill is a violation of the First Amendment right to free speech. Similar lawsuits are still pending against similar laws in Illinois and Michigan. No one is advocating the sale of violent and mature subject matter to children, but do you think the ESA has a point – is the law too unnecessary? Does it really violate free speech, and would it really be so bad if it went to effect this January? [Thanks, John]
New California violent games bill awaits Ah-nuld's signature
A few months ago, Illinois passed a bill penalizing retailers for selling adult games to minors. It is also happening in California, with bill AB 1179. This bill, approved by the California State Assembly in a 65-7 vote, requires that all violent games be required to have a large "18" sticker placed on its cover, as well as fine the retailers $1,000 for selling such games to minors (for a description to what "violent" video games the bill refers, check out Next Generation's explanation here). While the law seems understandable, naturally the video game industry, including the ESA and IEMA, are in an uproar over the bill, more or less calling it unnecessary and a violation of first amendment rights. Expect to see a lawsuit filed in the coming months, assuming Governor Schwarzenegger signs it in the next 30 days.
