Slashdot Mirror


Utah Governor Vetoes Jack Thompson's Game Sales Bill

Not long ago we discussed news that the Utah Senate and House had both passed legislation worked on by Jack Thompson that would add restrictions on how game advertising interacted with the rating system. The bill itself was poorly amended, and many questioned whether it would have the effect its sponsors desired. GamePolitics asked a First Amendment rights expert for his opinion on the matter, and the National Coalition Against Censorship spoke out against the bill, urging Governor Jon Huntsman to strike it down. Fortunately, it appears he took their advice (or that of many lobbying retailers), as the bill has now been vetoed. Huntsman said, "The industries most affected by this new requirement indicated that rather than risk being held liable under this bill, they would likely choose to no longer issue age-appropriate labels on goods and services."

6 of 36 comments (clear)

  1. Die, Die, DIE!!! by tygerstripes · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's gratifying, and somewhat surprising, to see state officials put a stake through the bloated, foetid, rotting corpse of that ridiculous little man.

    The guy's always been a noxious little puke, but when he started having a crack at Penny Arcade, it became clear just how deranged a nut-job he was.

    Sorry, I don't really have anything to add to the discussion. I just really wanted to smile and breathe a sigh: Yessssss...

    --
    Meta will eat itself
  2. I hope we'll see more by Jim+Hall · · Score: 3, Insightful

    GamePolitics asked a First Amendment rights expert for his opinion on the matter, and the National Coalition Against Censorship spoke out against the bill, urging Governor Jon Huntsman to strike it down. Fortunately, it appears he took their advice (or that of many lobbying retailers), as the bill has now been vetoed. Huntsman said, "The industries most affected by this new requirement indicated that rather than risk being held liable under this bill, they would likely choose to no longer issue age appropriate labels on goods and services."

    (emphasis mine)

    I'm optimistic that we'll see a lot more stories in the coming year like this one, of governors vetoing similar game-sale restrictions - or of state legislatures not passing these bills at all.

    But it's not just because of First Amendment issues. Apparently, that hasn't been a problem for the legislatures passing the bills in the first place. I think the downturn in the economy will wind up helping the game industry here.

    This governor clearly got the message: "the economy is in recession, and this bill would make it less likely that your state would have sales in a certain industry." And he wisely decided to veto the bill, so that game retailers in his state (WalMart, Target, EB/GameStop, ..) would continue to sell games. No doubt someone also showed him the sales numbers for the top games and how many of them would be affected by this bill (rated M). And so, had a bill like this already been on the books, those sales would not have happened in his state. I can't see any governor wanting to sign a bill that prevents money entering his state's economy, not at a time like this.

    Money drives a lot of things, and the economy clearly drives decisions at the government level.

    1. Re:I hope we'll see more by ATMAvatar · · Score: 3, Informative

      My understanding of that last line is that game companies would simply stop rating games, not that they would stop selling them. The loophole in the bill is that the game companies cannot be held liable for unrated games.

      --
      "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
  3. Take a good look at WHY it was vetoed by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's nice to see something happen in "our" favor once in a while, but realize that this isn't. Yes, the outcome seems to be what people want: Less invasion of privacy, more personal responsibility and The Man (tm) generally getting off our back for a change. But this isn't why this bill was shot down. It wasn't even that the governor realized that he should probably not allow a bill sponsored by a nutcase to pass into law.

    It was shot down because the governor feared the studios would stop labeling their games altogether if they could be held liable for what label they slap on the box. This wasn't a victory for free speech or at least a step in the right direction. What would a studio do to cover its back? Label everything M. Even "Barnie's 'I love you' singalong" because you might see someone hug and that could be seen as something sexual (eeek!) by another nutjob.

    We're still in Utah, remember that!

    Bottom line would have been that the whole self-imposed rating system would go out the window and parents couldn't tell a Teletubbies preschooler educational game from a blood dripping slaughterfest. And you can imagine what he'd get to hear then, right? Right?

    This is no victory. Yes, we like the outcome, but that will only be temporary until Nutsy finds the time to reword it. And that he has far too much spare time should be known by now.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  4. Re:Utah has a rather progressive Governor. by Chris+Burke · · Score: 4, Funny

    Let's see you bring Utah into the *20th* century, and hopefully the 21st by inertia of it all.

    Well wait a minute, that's quite a bit of inertia you're talking about there, passing 2 centuries in less than one? What if that continues and then Utah is in the 22nd century before we've even left the 21st, and next thing you know Mormon colony ships are heading for Alpha Centauri while the rest of us are still trying to get a decent electric car.

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are
  5. Re:Utah has a rather progressive Governor. by andrewd18 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Joseph Smith wins a Space Race victory!