Slashdot Mirror
Could CA Violent Game Law Lead To an Industry Exodus?
donniebaseball23 writes "Oral arguments for the California games law are set to begin on November 2. It's a hugely important court case for the industry, and if the Supreme Court sides with the legislators it could lead to an exodus of talent from the games business, says one attorney. 'Certainly less games would be produced and there would be a corresponding job loss,' said Patrick Sweeney, who leads the Video Game practice at Reed Smith LLP. 'But I expect the impact will likely be significantly deeper. I believe the independent development community would be severely impacted. Innovation, both from a creative and technological aspect, would also be stifled. The companies, brands and individuals that we should be embracing as the visionaries of this creative and collaborative industry will migrate their talents to a more expressive medium.' Meanwhile, Dr. Cheryl K. Olson, author of Grand Theft Childhood, notes that even if California gets its way, it could backfire."
it would not cause an exodus. If putting age restriction and fines for violating them hurt industry, there would be no porn made in CA.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Unless I badly misunderstand, the law bans sales of games to people under 18. So the only impact here is on stores that sell the games, not on developers. Developers are free to make whatever they like, it is the stores that have to restrict who can buy it. They can still sell anything, they just can't sell it to anyone. Same as tobacco or alcohol.
The only way it would cause an exodus is if game sales plummeted and that would only happen if large amounts of sales of M rated games were being made to people under 18.
I don't buy that for a second. For one, most retailers already ID for games (Target IDs me and I'm 30 and shop there all the time). Also, kids don't tend to have a ton of money to spend. There's a reason there have been more adult targeted games: Adults have more to spend. When I was 14 I had to beg games out of my parents a couple times a year. Now I buy them as I please. Finally parents will just buy the shit anyhow, and that's still legal. Rare is it you hear about the kid who bought their own violent game, the parents bought it for them.
So unless I really misunderstand this, and if so please show me a link to the reality, I can't see it mattering much to the VG industry, it'll just ber a stupid burden on the retailers.
Physical game sales are on their way out the door anyway. Or they are with PC games that is... next-generation consoles will probably see the same displacement.
California's neighboring state, Nevada, would welcome these businesses because it would diversify its economy which is predominately based on alcohol, tobacco, gambling, and sex.
Plus, Nevada has no corporate income tax nor personal income tax.
What one fool can do, another can. (Ancient Simian Proverb)
"You must be over 18 to buy an M rated game."
"You must be over 18 to buy a violent game
FTFY. This law doesn't recognize ESRB ratings. The standards for this law are much lower.
Your comparison doesn't make much sense. Try something with a car instead.
There is no law, federal or state, that prohibits theaters from showing R (or higher) rated movies to minors. It is all voluntary, from the ratings issued by the MPAA to the individual theaters enforcing those ratings. The fact that lots of people do think it is actually illegal for minors to see these movies just shows that there is really no reason for the gaming law - the film version was struck down in 1965 (according to wikipedia) but the "voluntary" system still seems pretty effective (though I do seem to recall managing to get into numerous R-rated movies before I was 18).
All military shooters will take place in a parallel universe where the world's governments realize that while war is a means to an end, the cost of life is too great to be a viable option. All firearms were discarded, used only for sport now, and instead all guns are paintball guns. The UN sends judges to determine when soldiers have taken enough hits to be considered unfit to continue. In the end, the soldiers meet in the middle of the battlefield, shake hands, and pull out wet sponges to clean paint off the opposing teams's uniform and kit. In this world, in war, no matter which side is victorious, everyone is a winner.
That's a requirement which does not exist. Theaters card voluntarily, much like every major game retailer cards voluntarily.
How about the fact that it is not illegal to let a minor into an R-rated movie? Many people think it is, but in fact it is not. If a movie theatre lets someone under 17 into an R-rated movie, nobody is fined or imprisoned. Someone might get fired, but getting fired is a far cry from being subject to prosecution. Instead, the theatre chains all have agreed to voluntarily impose policies enforcing the ratings. Note that exactly the same is true of all the major game retailer - and modern game consoles come with parental controls, which when enabled won't allow games of certain ratings to be played.
This law would create an entirely new kind of legal trouble just for violent video games that doesn't exist for any other medium. In my book, that's reason enough to oppose it.