Assassin's Creed 4: Black Flag for PC to come after consoles
DTS Headphone:X brings 11.1 channel surround sound to headsets
Xbox One policy change means loss of family sharing, disc-free gaming
Steam beta code implies game-sharing plans
Crytek working on The Collectibles for iOS
The War Z renamed Infestation: Survivor Stories due to 'trademark issues'
![Microsoft reverses stance on 24-hour check-in, used games for Xbox One [update]](http://cf.shacknews.com/images/20130521/early_photo2_25774.npssd.jpg)
Microsoft reverses stance on 24-hour check-in, used games for Xbox One [update]
Mobile review: XCOM: Enemy Unknown
Sony apologizes for faulty PS3 update, investigating cause
Killer is Dead preview: Mondo uncertainty
House bill would prohibit violent game sales to minors
by Steve Watts, Jan 18, 2013 9:30am PSTAs the political dialogue on video game violence continues in the wake of the shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, state representatives are starting to propose and draft legislation that would place restrictions on the game industry. One proposal would tax violent video games, while a drafted House bill would ban the sale of Adults Only or Mature-rated games to minors.
The AP (via Joystiq) reports that Representative Diane Franklin (R-MO) is proposing a 1% sales tax on violent video games, the proceeds of which would then be put towards law enforcement. This is similar to an Oklahoma bill that was defeated in a state house subcommittee last year.
Meanwhile, a new bill from Jim Matheson (D-UT), HR-287 (PDF), would require ratings labels on games, and restrict retailers from selling AO or M-rated games below their respective age recommendations of 18 or 17. Failure to comply with any part of the law would result in a fine up to $5,000 per violation. While the ESRB already exists to voluntarily rates games as a bit of self-regulation for the industry, the bill would make it a legal requirement.
If this all sounds incredibly familiar, it's because the Supreme Court struck down a similar state law from California in 2011. The state law would have imposed its own standards for what qualified as a violent game, so HR-287 wouldn't have that problem. But the SCOTUS' ruling was couched in the First Amendment, stating outright that "the basic principles of freedom of speech do not vary" based on the medium. So if this bill passes into law, it would likely be challenged in court.
To some extent the game industry is battling public perception. A NBC/WSJ News Poll (PDF) released last night showed 62% of respondents claiming violent media like movies and video games hold at least "a good amount" of responsibility for shootings like the ones in Tuscon and Newtown. By comparison, availability of guns and other weapons in general was only believed to be responsible at 53%, and availability of assault firearms was at 59%. This echoes Vice President Biden's recent comments that public opinion may be against the game industry.
Comments
Politicians are proposing bills that would impact the game industry: one that would impose a 1% tax on violent games, and another that would restrict their sale to minors.
Politicians are proposing bills that would impact the game industry: one that would impose a 1% tax on violent games, and another that would restrict their sale to minors. : Shacknews
Thread Truncated. Click to see all 92 replies.
That is true but my point about unrated dvds was in response to your comment that if the mpaa didn't enforce their code the government would. I was trying to point out that the movie industry already goes around their own ratings and actually uses "unrated" as a selling point for dvds.
Which I would think is the way the industry intentionally wants it so that they can try and get away with what they like should it suit them.
That might be true but only if the people making the film know that. Instead filmmakers submit a film for rating and get a rating with little explanation of why or what it would take to get a different rating.
What I was trying to point out is that the MPAA is not "clearly enforcing societal norms" but opaquely enforcing their own arbitrary rules which may or may not have anything to do with societal norms.
IIRC, the US government did use to have ratings boards.
There used to be the Hays code which was created by the film industry in response to local and state censorship boards which would routinely edit movies to take out "objectionable content." This was legal at the time because the Supreme Court had declared that films weren't entitled to first amendment protection. That case wasn't overturned until the 50s. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Picture_Production_Code
You must be logged in to post.