Slashdot Mirror
Video Game Industry to Sue Michigan's Governor
hapwned writes "A news release at Warcry writes that the ESA (Entertainment Software Association) plans on filing suit in Michigan to overturn the recent Violent Games Act. From the article: 'The ESA argues that this bill is an effort to substitute the government's judgment for parental supervision and turn retailers into surrogate parents. Lowenstein said that the industry's products were being unreasonably and unfairly singled out. He contends that while there is no question that a few games have content that some audiences will find offensive, the same can be said for some content in TV, films, music, and books. Since the government does not regulate the sales of those entertainment industries, it should follow suit for the sale of video games. Ultimately, he concluded, parents, not government or industry, must be the gatekeepers of what comes in the home.'"
It's not the Government's place to tell it's population what they can, and can't play.
Really, it's gone way the fuck too far.
~The TwoTailedFox posts again....
Its like some of those 'soviet russia' jokes are coming to life.
"In soviet russia, games sue you!"
were doomed!
A morning without coffee is like something without something else.
Ha! Damn politicians thought they could just roll over the games industry eh? To be honest, I didn't think that the entertainment companies had it in them to challenge the government. Good for them!
anybody got fined 12,000 dollars for renting or selling a "violent" movie to a youngster?
or better yet, a cartoon.
or an orson scott card novel.
Doug Lowenstein.
Come on guys, you know that name.
The IDSA. The same guys that were tearing down emulation sites by the dozens between 1998 and 2000. I still have some screwed up pictures of the guy someplace on my hard drive from back in the days of utter hatemail over the issue.
So I'm torn to even begin to support anything the guy or the new name of the computer entertainment mafia. But they are right.
Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).
But why does this have to turn into yet another round of Sue Somebody(TM), much less the governor? Even if I were to sue somebody, I'd sue the state legislature first, or better yet, the special interest groups that started the bill in the first place.
Skype is too convoluted... Now I'm reverse-engineering the Kyoto Protocol.
But industry shouldn't have a role? That's crazy talk. Parents ought to keep a close eye on the things their kids do, but it is also the community's responsibility to raise kids rightly. If a kid is running around Wal-mart yelling and screaming, most of the time people just look the other way and mutter under their breath. But that is doing a huge disservice to the child who will not learn proper behavior.
So too is it important that industries concentrate on producing high-quality, wholesome products. Whether this be something as nutritious as breakfast cereal or as empty as your typical R-rated movie, it is important that the community standards to which a majority of a community profess are supported by the corporation's product.
It is good business to provide people with things they need. But there is also a lot of money involved in selling people their vices. We do not accept people who wish to sell drugs to minors, nor do we absolve of guilt those who would ply them with alcohol.
It is not always 100% the job of the parent. The community must be held responsible to the extent that they have offered moral corruption from beyond the purview of the child's parents.
Jesus saved me from my past. He can save you as well.
I don't see why this compromise can't be reached. At that point we will be conducting due diligence, and can reach that wonderful state of plausible deniability.
I think they should just do a Counterstrike tourney to settle this lawsuit.
Who cares, this all comes way too late to save the Lemmings.
&sniff;
org.slashdot.post.SignatureNotFoundException: ewg
Ultimately, he concluded, parents, not government or industry, must be the gatekeepers of what comes in the home.
Why should parents raise their kids when the government is happy to do it?
Why is it that in America we allow such things to happen? What happened to parents taking responsibility for their children? As a child I remembered hearing my parents telling me "No". And if I continued bothering them the spanking would commence. These days parents are afraid to be parents because of how government regulates children. If a parent disciplines their kids by spanking, it's bad. But if this is not done, than they will grow up and be miscreants. As a conservative right-winged nut, I refuse to blame the game industry. It is the parent's responsibility to take handle of the situation. If you are reading this and want to understand what happens to a generation of children who never got spanked, by all means read Starship Troopers by Heinlein. Parents take back your children or else the state will impose its foot into your house.
"C++ is to C as Lung Cancer is to Lung"
I always try to RTFA immediately after RTFSP (Reading The Fucking Slashdot Post), usually before RTFC (Reading The Fucking Comments), and certainly before MAFR (Making A Fucking Reply). :)
Skype is too convoluted... Now I'm reverse-engineering the Kyoto Protocol.
Um, the V-Chip, Janet Jackson's nipple...
films,
It seems to me that the movie industry, haveing been made an offer it couldn't refuse (from the US gov't back in the '20s) set up self regulation: Films get rated, distributors won't screen X, unrated or (often) NC-17 films.
music,
Content labels, and the world's largest retailer won't carry potty-mouth stuff.
and books.
Well, they've certainly been banned in the US before. Ulysses, Lolita....
Since the government does not regulate the sales of those entertainment industries...
Bzzzzzt.
Everybody's a libertarian 'till their neighbour's becomes a crack house.
with an Entertainment Industry suit.
Wow thats weird.
I have a theory I'm testing out, could you help me by answering one simple question?
Have you successfully raised two or more children?
My theory is that people who have don't dispense parenting advice in glib little phrases and hold forth that parenting is simple.
Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
And, when all else fails, pick on people's spelling.
ACCEPT != EXCEPT
Dunno. How long has Wal mart been running US foreign policy viz China?
Everybody's a libertarian 'till their neighbour's becomes a crack house.
It's not the government's job to "protect" anyone from themselves, no matter how many times they've orbited the sun. Help given to someone who doesn't want it is not help at all.
The fact that they've passed laws before to protect people from themselves doesn't mean it was the right thing to do, nor is it justification for passing even more of them.
Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
Also I think we should ban high school football. God knows how much violence that has caused outside of playing it.
Um... feel free to correct me (and I'm sure everyone will leap at the opportunity), but I thought the whole idea of the bill was to ensure that the parents DO get involved. Ie, a child cant go to the video store and buy a NC-17 game (or whatever the classification system is), but instead has to get their PARENTS to buy the game for them.
Otherwise, the kid could just buy the game and hide it until the parents aren't around.
Yes, this is an inconveinece for the store clerks, that have to vet customers ages, and yes it'll reduce sales because there'll be fewer games being sold. But saying that this bill does NOT support a parent's interjection in a child's activities is just stupid.
In the US you can be a todler and go into a games store and buy something like... Vampire Bloodlines (with plotlines involving snuff films, butchering babies, killing police officers...) or some other pleasant game like GTA SA.
But you can't at age 18 walk into a pub and order a pint of beer...
I don't really understand it, computer games are like videos, just so far worse graphics and more interactive, but I'd imagine soon it'll reach video quality. Which begs the question... isn't letting a minor buy a sex-rape-killathon style video game over the counter the same as letting a minor walk into a dirty sex video shop and buy the equliviant video off the shelf?
Posts like this just make my head spin...
Parents ought to keep a close eye on the things their kids do, but it is also the community's responsibility to raise kids rightly.
But? But?!? Parents ought to keep a close eye on the things their kids do. PERIOD. There is no 'but.' You're just making excuses for bad parenting, and then blaming it on society. Right. It's everyone ELSE'S fault you're a shitty parent and your kids is going nuts in a public place. That kind of attitude is part of the problem.
So too is it important that industries concentrate on producing high-quality, wholesome products. Whether this be something as nutritious as breakfast cereal or as empty as your typical R-rated movie, it is important that the community standards to which a majority of a community profess are supported by the corporation's product.
It is important for industries to concentrate on goods and services that people want to pay for. Thats it. No, no, stop, really. That is ALL. If it isn't in the industry's interests to produce what you call "wholesome" products, then it has no responsibility to do so. The industry doesn't owe you anything. Why should anyone be able to hold them to their own personal standards of decency through enforced legislation? Thats just crazy. If you don't like what they're selling, don't buy it.
There always seems to be a handful of outspoken activists railing against one thing or another that they consider offensive. There is always talk about common decency, community standards, etc. But you get right down to it, most of the stuff they find offensive (popular Movies, TV shows, GTA) is hugely popular. Many many many times more people are actually buying and enjoying the very things these "defenders of decency" are opposed to. This leads me to ask "Just what mythical puritan community ARE these people representing?" Because when you look at the numbers, THEY are the ones in the minority.
It is good business to provide people with things they need. But there is also a lot of money involved in selling people their vices. We do not accept people who wish to sell drugs to minors, nor do we absolve of guilt those who would ply them with alcohol.
You're comparing video games drugs and alcohol? You've got to be kidding me....
It is not always 100% the job of the parent.
Um, yes. Yes it is.
The community must be held responsible to the extent that they have offered moral corruption from beyond the purview of the child's parents.
As I said before, the community is not responsible for your child. You are.
But say you're right. What if this mythical magical "community" is responsible? What are you going to do about it? Who are you going to punish? All community is, is a group of individuals. Are you going to just start selecting subsets of individuals and punishing them for their 'irresponsibility'? In the case of GTA, who do you pick? Do you punish the head of Rockstar games? The development team? The marketing guy? Suddenly one of these people is responsible for your kid? Or what? It just doesn't make any sense. These people don't even know you, or you them. There is no way they can be blamed for your poorly raised child.
Your kid, Your problem
"To lead the people, you must walk behind them"
How thoughtful of the game industry to support the individual's right to raise their own children. Except that it is blatantly obvious that their only reason for doing this is so that they can take advantage of people who don't take an interest in what their kids are doing. The fact that the game industry is against it is fairly strong evidence that the problem exists to be taken advantage of. I'm as against this kind of government regulation as the next guy, but that doesn't make the game industry in any way right.
So are you saying there is no correlation between parenting experience and parenting skill?
Because I would think that a person with more parenting experience than myself is more likely than not going to know more about it and have a more valuable opinion. I think your reply that x+y
I think the notion that we were all kids once so we all equally knowledgeable about parenting is not logical.
Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
Uh huh. Because precisely what we need are more laws, because we can't trust parents to be responsible enough to apply their moral values (which may not be the same as yours, by the way) to their little bastards.
I don't know what pisses me off more, the government sticking its dick in everyones proverbial ass, or the parents that expect laws to do their jobs for them.
Shit like this is proof positive that democracies and republics are goddamn shams, because damn near everyone is goddamn stupid and their combined ineptitude ends up fucking the whole thing up.
Slashdot is proof that Sturgeon's Law applies to mankind.
Michigan gets alot of press. Timothy McVeigh Bowling for Columbine Michigan Militia UofM Football Quami Killpatrick (No I have no clue how to spell his name)
Sometimes when I'm working on projects things disappear, I suspect gremlins.
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences."
C.S. Lewis
Here's the Bill's webpage and the final version signed by Governor Granholm at 11:58am EDT today.
GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
"Who pays for smokers who can't work because of emphysema, or the man who ends up in trauma care
because he chose not to wear his seat belt?"
The same people that pay for crack babies, welfare moms and homeless people. The same people that indirectly sponsor cancer research through government grants. Taxpayers.
No matter what the system is, there will be those that contribute and those who unfairly benefit from it. All you can do is try to intelligently manage it and keep the damage low. However this is all unrelated to the topic at hand, which is a small, lazy, vocal group grabbing the reins of the government and steering it into an Orwellian domain where what you see and what you play is strictly monitored by the government.
The less responsibility you take for yourself, the more responsibility society, and by extension, the government, must take for you. Stop expecting the government and laws to solve your problems, and stop trying to pass laws that circumvent the freedom we all take for granted in this country.
Uh huh. Because precisely what we need are more laws, because we can't trust parents to be responsible enough to apply their moral values (which may not be the same as yours, by the way) to their little bastards.
Hey I'm a parent, and I'm extremely vigilant in this regard. I certainly don't need laws to do my job for me! On the other hand, I'm surrounded by people who don't seem to give a rat's arse about what their kids are exposed to. I used to love free speech before it was taken away, but letting your 4 year old watch the Texas Chainsaw Massacre? C'mon!
My problem is this: I can raise my boys to be ethical and as they get older, to understand entertainment violence in context, but my family is not an island. My kids (and my self for that matter) will have to live in a world filled with the demon spawn that other parents have negilently released into the community. So while I don't need laws to tell me to do my job, I do need laws to tell those other parents to do theirs.
That being said, the Law is a very blunt instrument when it comes to getting parents to take their responsibilities seriously. You can't censor out all the violent cultural material, at lest not without creating an intolerably saccharine culture. (Conversely, of course, some material is so objectionable that no civilised society should tolerate it, eg. children's programming which extols the virtues becomming a suicide bomber.) I'm just no sure how we can get parents to take an interest and to realise the responsibility they owe to their fellow citizens.
Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
Someone FINALLY clues into what I have said to my peer group (and been sound berated for) It's about bloody time parents started taking responsibility for their offspring.
I have always maintained that kids blaming their anti-social behavior on video games, music, movies, etc was a cop-out, a way of deflecting blame and reducing their possible heavy sentence.
I grew up watching the Big Bunny & Roadrunner Show. The most violent cartoons of their time (not to mention Tom & Jerry) and I don't go around smacking people with a 2X4. I was also seriously seriously teased throughout my grade school life. I also thought about grabbing a gun and blowing away more than a few of my fellow students. I didn't because.......
MY PARENTS TOOK AN INTEREST IN RAISING ME!!!!!!!
Parenting is not just having offspring but also raising that offspring to be a productive member of society wether they be ditch-digger, philosopher, politician or scientist. It doesn't matter what they become as long as they contribute to society rather than interfering with it.
I know this is kind of a rant/lecture but I care about human-kind. (Plus I've have a couple of Canadian-strength beers)
The GEEK shall inherit the earth...
If parenting is such a burden to the common whiny parent, then I move to totally eliminate the entire parental concept and let the government control all infants born in our fine nation. Such a radical thing could not exist in our current form of government, so it is necessary to remake our government to satisfy these claims. Anyone who has read 'Platos Republic' would have a good idea of what I am suggesting, but I will enlighten you all on my interpretation and opinion on how our current culture would design this fabulous creation.
Ahemm...
We need to destroy our constitution, human rights, marriage, religion, and of course, the common family unit consisting of a father, mother, and children. With our clean slate, we are now free to craft this new republic.
First off, a child is born and immediately sent into government processing. (I will explain how the child was produced later)
1 - Government is responsible for raising the child, this includes housing, feeding, and education.
-> Child lives in a type of nursery where trained (Beta) females, headed by an (Alpha) female, would raise all infants until the point of basic language comprehension (Typically 3 years of age). Other responsibilities would include recognizing birth defects, mental and physical retardations. Such children would be removed from the nursery and experimented on so as to identify the causes of these defects, they are later terminated.
-> Children passed the age of 3 are then formed into logical clusters based on specified breeding arrangements from their parents. They are then dormed together so that each cluster will receive a unique program of education designed to bring out the expected results concluding from their eugenic pattern.
-> Education typically involves physical training, lingual understandings and comprehensions, mathematics, sciences, technology, and creativity. (History, Philosophy, and Art doesn't exist anymore. We want our children to be intelligent, but we don't need them to 'Think')
-> Graduation from this education system will determine what classifications each child will have within our republic.
I will break these classifications down into 3 categories and then reduce each category by gender.
[Alpha Male & Female]
-> Forms the collective governemt to rule its people. All nation affecting decisions are decided solely on individuals who qualified necessary characteristics from their education. These people are not elected, but instead chosen products of perfect excellence who understand fully the needs and growths of our fine nation.
-> Designs all the mating patterns of the populace, combining both physical prowess and acedemic brilliance in hopes of producing a new generation of more superior (Alphas).
-> Forms all departments of theoretical sciences and invention.
-> Elders become professors in order to educate newer generations.
[Alpha Females]
-> Heads all nurseries so as to maximize the efficiency of infant growth.
[Beta Males & Females]
-> Organizes the developments of the common national needs, such as, food & water, medicine, transportation, government controls, and military.
-> Provides foundations to encourage creativity, entertainment, and growth. (Video games, movies, music and what not would occur here.)
-> Organizes breeding programs with the intention to produce a new generation to maintain these (Beta) programs.
[Beta Females]
-> Responsible for raising all infants produced for the government.
[Delta Males]
-> Those lacking in education are put into greater physical training programs and then placed in the military, programmed to be a meat shield for our nation, protecting and enforcing its interests upon the world.
-> Mental and physical experimentations for a wide array of reasons. Mainly to determine why eugenic expectations failed. Also to create cybernetic and geneti
If i wanted to hear bullshit, i'd go to church.
i'm a michigan resident in my late 20's...when i buy booze its i usually get carded 50% of the time. i remember when i purchased doom 3 last year, the chick who rang me up asked me for my id, and not a year before that, some kid carded me when i wanted to buy tickets to a rated r movie.
is it just me, or is the fact that its easier to buy booze than it is for me to watch a show or play a game really illustrate just how fucked and buracratic we've become.
dude.
I'm just no sure how we can get parents to take an interest and to realise the responsibility they owe to their fellow citizens.
IMHO, the first step would be to stop pushing parenthood and stop providing incentives for it.
If the only people who had kids were those who really give enough of a shit to take the responsibility seriously (like it sounds like you are) rather than just every dipshit who wants to be a part of something or wants something to love them then that problem would dissipate
Part of this is governmental which we (supposedly) have some power over (subsidies).
The other part is societal e.g. TV, commercials, and movies (the pushing thing).
That's way tougher to address given that whole freedom of speech thing.
Another alternative is punishments for parents when their kids screw up.
That's a real tough one as well due to nature/nurture/societal influences etc.
So, it is a really serious issue but it's a really tough one as well.
Good luck with yours.
We completely disagree.
"We"?
The populace, under 18, needs to be prevented from pr0n, booze, weapons, and in this particular case, violent video games or those video games with adult images in them.
No, they don't. European children manage to handle nudity and alcohol at younger ages, and they're turning out all right. Hell, they have lower rates of teen pregnancy than the US.
There's nothing wrong with watching porn or violent imagery, as long as you know the difference between fantasy and reality. That comes along in the single digit age range, not at 18.
Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
The only problem with those laws (well not the only, but still...) is they allow the irresponsible parents to file suit against the gaming industry because they were too lazy to look at the box and see what kind of content the game had before forking over the money for the kid to buy the game. So, if the law is to be there, it should at least have the stipulation that the industry can't be taken to court for money or anything other than to have them fix the content that is in violation of the rating it was given. After that the state should take the kid(s) away from the parents for the parents being negligent in taking care of the kids. Of course, taxpayers would be paying for this.
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
Seems a lot of people here are over-reacting, including the ESA.
/ billenrolled/senate/htm/2005-SNB-0416.htm
All this bill does, as best as I can understand it, is prevent a retailer from selling a "naughty" game to someone under 18.
It's nothing different than the age requirements for an R-Rated movie at the movie theatre. It simply says that little Johnny can't plunk down $50 and buy GTA.
If Johnny tries, and suceeds, then the retailer who sold it to him can be fined. If a game is given a Mature/Adult rating, then shouldn't we enforce it at the retail level like we do movies?
I'm all for parental supervision, but mom can't watch Johnny 24/7. If I were a parent, I would want to know that my kid couldn't go buy GTA without an adult's assistance.
BTW, the entire bill can be read here:
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2005-2006
-David
I live in Michigan. SB 416 restricts sale or rental of violent or sexually explicit video games *to minors*. TFA conveniently fails to reveal that point.
According the to the bill folks 18 and over can buy or rent anything they want.
we see things not as as they are, but as we are.
-- anais nin
Another one bites the dust