+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 37

Thread: Video Games receive 1st Amendment Protection today

  1. #1
    Rift Disciple
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    144

    Default Video Games receive 1st Amendment Protection today

    Brown vs Entertainment Merchants Association was decided today:

    http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/08-1448.pdf

    Video games qualify for First Amendment protection. Like protected books, plays, and movies, they communicate ideas through familiar literary devices and features distinctive to the medium. And “the basic principles of freedom of speech . . . do not vary” with a new and different communication medium.
    Like the protected books, plays, and movies that preceded them, video games communicate ideas—and
    even social messages—through many familiar literary devices (such as characters, dialogue, plot, and music) and through features distinctive to the medium (such as the player’s interaction with the virtual world). That suffices to confer First Amendment protection. Under our Constitution, “esthetic and moral judgments about art and literature . . . are for the individual to make, not for the Government to decree, even with the mandate or approval of a majority.”
    It is a very interesting read if you have the time. Either way, it's a step in the right direction in my opinion.

  2. #2
    Ascendant
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,539

    Default

    Does this mean you don't have to have an RP name on an RP server?
    DK of The Fast and the Fairyous: Tokyo Rift

  3. #3
    Ascendant Haseno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Indiana/USA
    Posts
    3,777

    Default

    This is a very good thing. The US Government pretty much wanted to restrict much of the creativity offered by video games, as well as restrict access to them entirely.


    Haseno
    "Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
    I love my comma's, deal with it, chump.

  4. #4
    Shadowlander Krystin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    38

    Default

    prohibits the sale or rental of “violent video games” to minors, and requires their packaging to be labeled “18.” The Act covers games “in which the range of options available to a player in-cludes killing, maiming, dismembering, or sexually as-saulting an image of a human being
    court concluded that the Act violated the First Amendment and permanently enjoined its enforcement
    Hmm... Is this saying what I think it's saying?

  5. #5
    Ascendant Haseno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Indiana/USA
    Posts
    3,777

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krystin View Post
    Hmm... Is this saying what I think it's saying?
    I may be incorrect, but I'm pretty sure California Law-Makers were pushing for a bill which bans the sales or distribution of violent video games. The U.S. Supreme court protected video games under the 1st Amendment.

    It even talks about America not scrutinizing material with aggressive material, or fighting words if you read farther down.


    Haseno
    "Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
    I love my comma's, deal with it, chump.

  6. #6
    Ascendant Sinndel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    4,537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Haseno View Post
    I may be incorrect, but I'm pretty sure California Law-Makers were pushing for a bill which bans the sales or distribution of violent video games. The U.S. Supreme court protected video games under the 1st Amendment.

    It even talks about America not scrutinizing material with aggressive material, or fighting words if you read farther down.
    One small step for liberty, one giant fail for society as a whole. Next pornography and prostitution will be protected by the first amendment.
    Last edited by Sinndel; 06-27-2011 at 10:53 AM.
    I have a photoshopic memory. I remember everything you say or do exactly the way I want to.

  7. #7
    Rift Disciple
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    144

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krystin View Post
    Hmm... Is this saying what I think it's saying?
    Scalia references the point from Stevens vs CA, that violence does not equal obscenity which is why this proposed law is invalidated.

    That holding controls this case. As in Stevens, California has tried to make violent-speech regulation look like obscenity regulation by appending a saving clause required for the latter. That does not suffice. Our cases have been clear that the obscenity exception to the First Amendment does not cover whatever a legislature finds shocking, but only depictions of “sexual conduct,” Miller, supra, at 24. See also Cohen v. California, 403 U. S. 15, 20 (1971); Roth, supra, at 487, and n. 20.

  8. #8
    Rift Disciple
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    144

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sinndel View Post
    One small step for liberty, one giant fail for society as a whole. Next pornography and prostitution will be protected by the first amendment.
    Pornography has been for years. Prostitution has never been and will not be.

  9. #9
    Rift Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    626

    Default

    Good read.
    I remember when groups were saying violent games make violent citizens. My generation played Mortal Kombat out the wazoo and none of us are killing ppl. I have known 2 ppl in my city that were serial murdered. One was by some boys doped up on *** and she was mentally challenged so they talked her out of the house robbing it one night and the other was a boy that I grew up with that ended up a streetwalker and was eventually killed by Herbert Baumeister (could or could not be the spelling on his last name). Neither had to do with games - its opportunism.

    We didn't have kids shooting up schools but I think that's because children aren't spanked now (not that I love spanking but it did work because you were afraid) and everyone knows crimes under 18 rarely garner appreciable time so what risk is there in being a "bad kid". The role models for kids are skanky too - its sad to imagine being a young girl thinking that I would have to believe paris hilton was someone to worship.

    Kids also seem to feel entitled to things, the latest electronics and being told they are worthwhile even when they are average. If I didn't come home with an A I was in big trouble because my father was old school. I'm smarter for it so I am ok with it because it made me study harder and get over my slumps. My exes nephew and neice are a different generation and C's are good enough, drinking is ok if its with family etc.

    Things are just different but I don't see games as ever the reason ppl act out. If anything for the psychos they give them a nice clean place to fantasize that hurts no one.
    As for prostitution I say legalize it and tax it - ppl are doing it anyway, lets keep it cleaner and I am a woman.
    Last edited by Fernt; 06-27-2011 at 10:59 AM.

  10. #10
    Ascendant Sinndel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    4,537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VanDiego View Post
    Scalia references the point from Stevens vs CA, that violence does not equal obscenity which is why this proposed law is invalidated.
    Oh, that important distinction makes my previous post completely invalid XD In that case, good for them!

    The one thing I always hated to see was the argument that violent video games cause people to become violent, wich is a blatant lie. I've played all sorts of violent video games growing up, starting with Donkey Kong and Super Mario, and ending now with Rift and Heavenly sword, and the though of harming another human being in real life physically sickens me. So I hope we've heard the end of that stupid argument at least.
    Last edited by Sinndel; 06-27-2011 at 11:01 AM.
    I have a photoshopic memory. I remember everything you say or do exactly the way I want to.

  11. #11
    Ascendant Haseno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Indiana/USA
    Posts
    3,777

    Default

    A serial killer may indeed be triggered by violent video games, but they're never influenced by them. They're most definitely unstable even prior to seeing said "violent video games."

    A serial killer may indeed be triggered by a violent book, but never influenced by them. They're most definitely unstable even prior to seeing said "violent books."

    etc. etc.

    If we lived in fear of what art expressed, even if it may be distasteful to some. Then the world would be pretty dull, in all honesty.
    Last edited by Haseno; 06-27-2011 at 11:03 AM.


    Haseno
    "Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
    I love my comma's, deal with it, chump.

  12. #12
    Prophet of Telara Sarablu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,017

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VanDiego View Post
    Scalia references the point from Stevens vs CA, that violence does not equal obscenity which is why this proposed law is invalidated.
    Yah.

    Games celebrating the depiction of people being gutted, beheaded, tortured, mutilated (and otherwise just having a good wholesome violent time) by their fellow man should never be confused with the horror and trauma-inducing depravity of a depiction of two people making love.

    We are, after all, a civilized society.
    Cogito Ergo Femina Sum

  13. #13
    Rift Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    626

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarablu View Post
    Yah.

    Games celebrating the depiction of people being gutted, beheaded, tortured, mutilated (and otherwise just having a good wholesome violent time) by their fellow man should never be confused with the horror and trauma-inducing depravity of a depiction of two people making love.

    We are, after all, a civilized society.
    Isn't that the hypocrisy of it. Youtube can show violence in any form but if there is one boob it's deemed as adult content. Anyone pay attention to how violent cartoons are - geez. They do all sorts of nasty things to each other and donald duck never wore pants - what a perv.

  14. #14
    Ascendant Haseno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Indiana/USA
    Posts
    3,777

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarablu View Post
    Yah.

    Games celebrating the depiction of people being gutted, beheaded, tortured, mutilated (and otherwise just having a good wholesome violent time) by their fellow man should never be confused with the horror and trauma-inducing depravity of a depiction of two people making love.

    We are, after all, a civilized society.
    How would you feel, when me and my father gut a deer and serve burgers?


    Haseno
    "Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
    I love my comma's, deal with it, chump.

  15. #15
    Rift Disciple
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    144

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fernt View Post
    Isn't that the hypocrisy of it. Youtube can show violence in any form but if there is one boob it's deemed as adult content. Anyone pay attention to how violent cartoons are - geez. They do all sorts of nasty things to each other and donald duck never wore pants - what a perv.
    I'm tending to think you two are leaning more towards morality issues as opposed to obscenity issues. YouTube not wanting to show breasts on it's site is Google's decision not something the government decreed.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts