Censorship

#1 What do they class as violent?

#2 Here's the E-mail in case u were curious, it also gives a better descripion than i did.

Dear IGDA Members and friends,

** Action required BEFORE October 9th **

I am writing to ask for your urgent help. In the waning hours of the 2005 legislative session, the California Assembly passed AB 1179 which requires "violent" video games imported or distributed in California be labeled with a 2x2 inch "18" on the front of the package and prohibits the sale or rental of such games to persons under the age of 18.

This legislation is now on the Governor's desk for his consideration. He has until October 9th to approve/veto the bill, but may do so earlier...


If enacted, AB 1179 would treat computer and video games differently from any other form of media even though they are an expressive medium worthy of the same constitutional free speech protections as movies, music, books and art. Therefore, attempts to regulate computer and video game content or our consumers' access to this creativity as provided under AB 1179 run afoul of constitutional protections. It also subjects our industry, which directly and indirectly employs tens of thousands of people in California, to regulations that could impair its ability to compete in the marketplace.

See below for further "key points" on the need to oppose this bill.


Your help is needed in sending a letter to the Governor urging a veto of AB 1179.

A draft letter is available online:
http://www.igda.org/censorship/CA_ab1179_letter.php


Please make sure that you sign, print your name and include your address on the letter. And, feel free to make any edits you see fit. Please mail and fax (916-445-4633) your letter to the Governor. The cc at the bottom of the letter will ensure that the appropriate staff members receive a copy of your fax


Thanks for your consideration of this urgent request. If you have any questions, please let me know.

Jason Della Rocca
Executive Director, IGDA
jason@igda.org


Key Points:

- No other entertainment industry's products are regulated by the state, even though other media have controversial content. There is no basis to treat video games differently from other media.

- AB 1179 is unconstitutional. Three federal courts have already struck down similar state and local statutes. Thus, it will not help a single parent do their jobs better.

- AB 1179 is unnecessary. Retailers accounting for 90% of video game sales are voluntarily implementing programs to prevent sales to minors of Mature and Adult Only video games. These efforts are beginning to work and there is no need for the state to intervene.

- The FTC reports that parents are involved in the purchase or rental of eight out of ten games. In other words, rather than unconstitutional laws the state would do better to focus on programs to educate parents about video game ratings. The State did exactly that a year ago when it enacted a law to require retailers to post signage about video game ratings.

- The video game industry has created a successful self-regulatory program to rate its products through the Entertainment Software Rating Board. The ESRB provides consumers with information about the age appropriateness and content of video games. Peter Hart Research found that parents overwhelmingly agree with the accuracy of ESRB ratings.

- Given how vague and broad the bill's language is, it could have a chilling effect on game development in California. Game creation is a massively complex mix of science and art. From software engineers to script writers to animators to music composers, every video game is a form of creative expressive speech fully protected by the First Amendment.

#3 Doesn't say, i think that's kinda the problem, it's very broad and non-specific.

#4 "- No other entertainment industry's products are regulated by the state, even though other media have controversial content. There is no basis to treat video games differently from other media."

Not true. Movies are regulated for violent content and so are books and magazines with X-rated content.

I support this law. It really just forces parents to take responsibility instead of us trusting them to take responsibility. So if they want their child to have a certain game, they have to actually get involved and understand what their kids are playing. It might wake up some parents who have no clue what their kids are doing.

#5 They aren't regulated by the state though (are they?) Video games ARE loosely regulated when it comes to very explicit content, but i think this far from the best way to go about fixing the problems. It also assumes that the industry can't do this itself, even though it can and IS doing this on it's own. It also doesn't say specifically that it will be limited to games that really are extremely violent, the limit will be whatever THEY feel is appropriate. Basically, i dont feel this is the right way to go about this whole situation.

#6 Hopefully, they won't also tack on a $2,500 price tag for use of the sticker like the ESRB charges for their ratings. When they say regulate, what they mean is $$. Its not to protect parents or kids, its to hit the games industry for money. They can also fine anyone that doesn't follow the law. Its not a quota its an efficiency analysis etc,. . .

#7 ..That's just stupid. I started a thread similar to this one a few months ago. I got some great posts. http://www.garagegames.com/mg/forums/result.thread.php?qt=31321

Anyway, the following information is based off of a post on that thread.

1950's - Comic books cause violent kids
1960's - TV causes violent kids
1970's - Cartoons cause violent kids
1980's - Heavy Metal causes violent kids
1990's - Spanking you child causes violent kids
2000's - Violent video games cause violent kids

#8 It's just an ignorant group of people lashing out at something they don't understand. People seem to have tried to pin violence as being caused by some specific thing for ages. One interesting note is on behavior and responsibility of kids, there are records from ancient times of parents commenting on the state of children's behavior and how it's been getting worse. So, if we're to beleive our parents;
society has been degrating for the past 3000-4000 years. If that was true we'd probably all be dead by now because when we were little we watched too much tv which caused us to slaughter each other during our lunch breaks at school. Also, most people seem to beleive that society has gotten better over the years ( that is, when u haven't just mentioned to them the subect of violence in media) with all our advances in entertainment and technology. Strange how people beleive conflicting points of view.

The problem is that they're lashing out with a bullwhip, and that can hurt.

#9 "I support this law. It really just forces parents to take responsibility instead of us trusting them to take responsibility. So if they want their child to have a certain game, they have to actually get involved and understand what their kids are playing. It might wake up some parents who have no clue what their kids are doing."

How? How does putting a sticker on the game and making it illegal to sell to minors force PARENTS to take responsibility? It forces the game retailers to take the responsibility...



Technically, Mario contains "violent" content, because those little Goombas have eyes, meaning they are living creatures, and you are mercilessly squishing them for points.

Recently, the courts overturned a Washington law that treated games with violence against police officers as an immediate 18+. Katamari Damacy would technically be considered to have "violence against police officers".



The problem with all of these laws is that the whole reason for their existence is to be vague enough that they can ban whatever the hell they want. We are a self-regulating industry, like movies and print, and there is no reason the government should get involved.

#10 Let's all give a woot woot to that wonderful entity called government! woot woot!

#11 I don't know whether or not these games cause kids to be more violent or not; I teach high school children and the ones who play the most violent games are not any more violent, but usually they are more anti-social than most of the other students.

But I am not as concerned about that as I am with the lack of creativity in modern games.

I don't consider "Mario" to be violent. But games where you are ripping people's organs out or blowing someone's guts away and it's graphically depicted, I'm tired of seeing so many games where gore and violence are the main draw.

I have seen a lot of very creative games come out of the Torque community but in the gaming world in general, I'm tired of seeing the same type of content over and over just because it sells. I don't really have a problem with the legislation. If it means more creativity can be tapped out of this amazing technology we have at our hands, than so be it. The indie community won't be too harmed by it, I suspect. MOst of the biggest culprits I see are larger commercial houses. Perhaps I'm wrong, but that's just what I see.

#12 "I don't consider "Mario" to be violent. But games where you are ripping people's organs out or blowing someone's guts away and it's graphically depicted, I'm tired of seeing so many games where gore and violence are the main draw."

That was my point. Nobody considers Mario violent, but the vagueness of the law allows somebody (with the initials 'JT' possibly) to claim that it is and get it an 18+ sticker.

#13 Well then perhaps the legislation should be designed to work in tangent with the existing "self-regulatory" process in the gaming community now. Let us rate the game and then pass it on to get "stamped" or not by the feds.

#14 Whats the problem? Kids aren't supposed to be allowed to buy them anyways..

""- No other entertainment industry's products are regulated by the state,"

PORN.

I didn't see anyone getting all upset around here over the Patriot Act or REAL ID etc... But, ya, video games are more important.. pffft.

#15

Quote:How? How does putting a sticker on the game and making it illegal to sell to minors force PARENTS to take responsibility? It forces the game retailers to take the responsibility...

Because if a retailer can't sell the game to a minor then they must sell it to the parent, which then makes it the parent's choice. (theoretically)

#16 Well, I have to admit, I've had some middle school students of mine (and still do) who go to GameStop and EBGames on a regular basis, and this would serve as a deterrent to them if they had to get an adult to buy games for them. It would force them , on their whimsical trips to the mall, to buy things that they could get themselves without parental consent.

#17 Cigarettes, tobacco, adult movies, guns... all sorts of things are regulated.

Plus - this is not "Censorship". The stuff is still for sale. Usually it's underage kids who get up in arms about this. I imagine most adults would either support it, or not care.

#18

Quote:

I imagine most adults would either support it, or not care.

Yes, I agree. I'm 35. I really don't care if a 12 year old is crying at GameStop because he can't buy BloodBath 2006.

#19 Because other things are regulated doesn't mean that more things should be regulated.

I agree this isn't censorship, but it is just as bad.

#20 "Usually it's underage kids who get up in arms about this."

Funny, I didn't realize that Jason Della Rocca was an underage kid... ?


People get up in arms about it because allowing a small amount of unconstitutional regulation leads to more unconstitutional regulation. Regulating GTA today can mean regulating Zelda tomorrow. Where do we draw the line? My vote is: draw the line before it ever happens, by regulating ourselves and not bowing down to the skewed political agendas that are driving the crusade against video games.

No, I'm not blowing this out of proportion. There are politicians, lawyers, etc whose entire goal is to regulate as much of the game industry as they can get away with. Usually, this is to gain support from the extremists who pretty much would rather never see a video game again.

Why do we have these extremists? Because people are afraid of new things, things that they don't understand. There was a time that movies went through the same witch-hunt, and the only reason they are still mostly unregulated is because their industry didn't just bow down and take it in the arse whenever somebody wanted to use them as a scapegoat.