QUICK LINKS: Vending Videos  |  Micromarkets  |

VT Classifieds

|

Buy a Classified Ad

|

Editorial Calendars

|

Circulation Data

|

Downloads

|

Bookstore

|

Operators Date Book

Search:      

Bookmark this site




Issue Date: Vol. 51, No. 7, July 2011, Posted On: 6/27/2011


High Court Strikes Down 'Violent' Videogame Law


Marcus Webb
Supreme Court decision on video games, video game violence, Brown vs. Entertainment Merchants Association, Amusement and Music Operators Association, California Assembly Bill 1179, AB 1197, Schwarzenegger vs. Entertainment Merchants Association & Entertainment Software Association, violent video games, violent video game ban, Leland Yee, First Amendment rights, arcade video game, coin-op video game

WASHINGTON -- In a major victory for the entertainment industry, the U.S. Supreme Court on June 27 struck down California's ban on sales and rentals of so-called "violent" videogames to minors, stating: "The Act does not comport with the First Amendment."

This verdict had the support of a strong majority in a 7-2 vote. The two dissenters were justices Thomas and Breyer. The ruling was issued shortly after 10 a.m. on the final day of the court's 2011 session and is now available under "Brown vs. Entertainment Merchants Association" at the court's website.

In its opinion, written for the majority by Justice Antonin Scalia, the court went on to say, "Videogames qualify for First Amendment protection. Like protected books, plays, and movies, they communicate ideas through familiar literary devices and features distinctive to the medium."

Citing an important precedent from an earlier case, Scalia's report said that the basic principles of freedom of speech do not vary with a new and different communication medium.

The majority also said that a legislature cannot create new categories of unprotected speech simply by weighing the value of a particular category against its social costs and then punishing it if it fails the test. "This country has no tradition of specially restricting children's access to depictions of violence," the justices stated. "California's claim that 'interactive' videogames present special problems, in that the player participates in the violent action on screen and determines its outcome, is unpersuasive."

The case of Brown vs. Entertainment Merchants Association stemmed from a California Assembly bill authored in 2005 by state Sen. Leland Yee (D-San Francisco). The proposed law was intended to ban the sale or rental of so-called "violent" videogames to players under age 18 and would have imposed a $1,000 fine per violation.

The law was intended to target consumer games played at home, but use of the word "rent" in the legal context meant that if the law had taken effect, law enforcement officials could potentially have applied the statute to coin-operated devices.

In the months leading up to the June 27 decision, entertainment industry members had voiced concern that if the Supreme Court had upheld California's law, it could have led to similar laws in 49 other states, creating a chilling effect for the videogame industry and perhaps for entertainment in general. | SEE STORY


Topic: Music and Games Features

Articles:
  • Whoa Nellie! Big Juicy Melons: Stern And Whizbang Partner To Build Electromechanical Pinball Machine
  • Herron Furniture Design Students Imagine A New Version Of Brunswick Billiard's Most Iconic Pool Table
  • Zeiss Gambles On Low Price Point With New VR Headset
  • Golden Tee LIVE 2015 Debuts With New Courses And Features; Incredible Technologies Announces AwesomeDraw Winners
  • New ATM Theft Threat: No Card Or Skimmer Required

Copyright © 2014 Vending Times Inc. All rights reserved. 
P: (516) 442-1850 | F: (516) 442-1849 | subscriptions@vendingtimes.net
55 Maple Ave. - Ste. 304, Rockville Centre, NY 11570