Minnesota Pays ESA $91K for Illegal Game Law

13
The state of Minnesota has reimbursed $65,000 in attorney fees and other expenses spent by the Entertainment Software Association in its successful challenge of an unconstitutional game law, the organization announced today.

The ESA, which is dedicated to the business and public affairs needs of game developers and publishers, also noted that it has now been awarded close to $2 million in fees and expenses spent battling unconstitutional game law in nine other districts.

"Minnesota's citizens should be outraged at paying the bill for this flawed plan. Minnesota's public officials ignored legal precedent and instead pursued a political agenda that ultimately cost taxpayers money," said ESA CEO Michael Gallagher.

Signed into law in June of 2006, the law sought to penalize minors for the rental or purchase of games rated M for Mature and above. An injunction to halt the law prior to implementation was issued two months later by Judge James M. Rosenbaum of the US District Court of Minnesota.

"Several other states have tried to regulate minors' access to video games. Every effort has been stricken for violating the First Amendment... The Court will not speculate as the motives of those who launched Minnesota's nearly doomed effort to 'protect' our children," Judge Rosenbaum said in a statement.

The ESA was reimbursed $91,000 after successfully challenging a similar law in the state of Louisiana, which was also deemed unconstitutional.

Last week, an overwhelming majority in the New York State Senate passed a bill proposing an advisory council for videogames. Introduced by Sen. Andrew Lanza (R) of Staten Island, the aim of the bill is to bring government oversight to game ratings beyond the service provided by the Entertainment Software Ratings Board.

The ESA's CEO added that "politicians need to realize that the key to protecting our children from inappropriate media content is not haphazard legislation, but rather parental education."

Filed Under
From The Chatty
  • reply
    June 30, 2008 11:41 AM

    [deleted]

    • reply
      June 30, 2008 11:45 AM

      Actually it's the equivalent of punishing a minor who tries to rent or purchase R rated (or above) movies.

      • reply
        June 30, 2008 11:51 AM

        [deleted]

      • reply
        June 30, 2008 11:55 AM

        There's no need to punish them, though. Just don't allow them to rent or purchase said mature content. Punishing them is ridiculous. If they get their hands on it anyway, fine. No big deal. Punish the people selling not the people buying.

        • reply
          June 30, 2008 12:01 PM

          Both are unconstitutional. That's been established over and over and over again.

          • reply
            June 30, 2008 12:05 PM

            "Both" referring to...? I have no idea what the US constitution is like. All I know is that I seem to hear the word unconstitutional a lot.

            I assume one of them is to punish minor, which is what I'm saying. But are you saying that it's unconstitutional to punish the ones doing the selling? That seems dumb... I'm talking jail time, just more along the lines of firing them. The same deal if you sell alcohol or cigarettes to minor because you fail at asking for ID (I'm not talking about shady stuff), y'know?

            • reply
              June 30, 2008 12:06 PM

              errr I'm NOT (not, NOT!) talking jail time. Heh. Everyone goes to prison!

            • reply
              June 30, 2008 12:25 PM

              Both laws that punish minors for buying and punishing vendors for selling violate the US Constitution's First Amendment:

              "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

              • reply
                June 30, 2008 12:58 PM

                So by such logic a minor should be able to walk into a video store/sex shop and buy a bunch of porn? Why do all adult sites have that "YOU MUST BE OVER 18 TO VIEW THIS MATERIAL" warning, then? I thought there was some kind of law there.

                Surely I'm not comparing video games to porn, that's ridiculous, but using the same "freedom of speech" logic, I don't see how watching people get gibbed by rocket launchers is very different from watching people get porked by sperm launchers.

                • reply
                  June 30, 2008 1:09 PM

                  The argument is that porn generally doesn't have meaningful "speech" and so can be regulated. Note that ordinary movies with nudity or even sex are not regulated as porn.

                  Video games can and do have meaningful speech and so are protected. This has been affirmed over and over again.

                  • reply
                    June 30, 2008 1:17 PM

                    I've never seen an R-rated film with hardcore sex, but I've seen plenty of films where there is "hardcore" violence. I don't know -- I'm one of those people who thinks that placing extreme violence lower on the "offensiveness pole" than porn is dumb.

                    • reply
                      June 30, 2008 1:52 PM

                      Films outside of pornography aren't regulated by the government, and there are quite a lot of films that never get shown in the big franchise movie theaters nor rated by the MPAA. Nudity and sex are more common in independent films than in mainstream cinema. (Incidentally, a number of porn-related "omg protect teh childrens" regulations have been struck down as unconstitutional as well.)

                      That's not the point, though. "Offensiveness" alone is not sufficient for a single work within a medium to be regulated, much less being enough to regulate the entire medium.

                      • reply
                        June 30, 2008 7:27 PM

                        Yeah, I get it. I just don't agree with it :)

                        I just look at myself -- I was exposed to all kinds of "bad media' as a young kid: R-rated movies, violent video games, eventually porn... and I turned out better than fine. I'm actually pretty successful for a guy my age.

                        It's all about the parents. I had (have) great parents who loved me and taught me the different between real/fiction, good/bad, and acceptable/unacceptable. They taught me how to take care of myself at a young age and allowed me to explore my independence, while always keeping a watchful eye. Maybe I'm "special," who knows, but I believe that good parenting is more important than any kind natural goodness. Every "bad" person I know -- addicts/alcoholics, criminals, etc. -- all suffered from bad parenting, while every good person I know has great parents.

                        I need one of hakshak's shirts.

                    • reply
                      June 30, 2008 2:00 PM

                      By the way, here's a very brief description of what it takes to create a law abridging free speech that passes Constitutional muster:

                      http://www.shacknews.com/laryn.x?id=14139077#itemanchor_14139077

Hello, Meet Lola