We Did It! (Video Games Are Now Constitutionally Protected Speech)

[Jack Kieser]

Reposted from Kotaku (Original Link):

"In a 7-2 ruling Justice Antonin Scalia said the law does not comport with the First Amendment. He was joined by Samuel Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts, who had seemed sympathetic to California's concerns last year. Justices Clarence Thomas and Stephen Breyer, traditionally members of the court's right and left wings, respectively, joined in dissent."

...

"'The basic principles of freedom of speech . . . do not vary' with a new and different communication medium,' Scalia wrote in the Court's opinion, citing an earlier speech case.

Writing for a plurality of justices, Scalia said California's arguments "would fare better if there were a longstanding tradition in this country of specially restricting children's access to depictions of violence, but there is none." He cited numerous examples of violence in literature. 'Reading Dante is unquestionably more cultured and intellectually edifying than playing Mortal Kombat. But these cultural and intellectual differences are not constitutional.'"

...

"The video game industry rejoiced at the decision. 'This is a historic and complete win for the First Amendment and the creative freedom of artists and storytellers everywhere,' said Michael Gallagher, head of the Entertainment Software Association. 'Today, the Supreme Court affirmed what we have always known – that free speech protections apply every bit as much to video games as they do to other forms of creative expression like books, movies and music.'"

Discuss.

 

[Fuelbi]

So this means that if a game like 7 Days in Fallujah were to be released people couldn't say **** about it?

Hell yeah

 

[SonicBOOM XS]

So this means that if a game like 7 Days in Fallujah were to be released people couldn't say **** about it?

Hell yeah

We'd have another MOH on it, though.

And yes, the Governator lost. We win. Back to normal.

Really, the only thing bad about this is that kids can still play COD and wreck it. No wait...

 

[Fuelbi]

Also, how is Mortal Kombat bad for kids? I mean yes, you decapitate various people, can literally slice a person in half, rip their hearts out, punch them in the groin and rip their spine out, etc., but if a kids and plays this and actually tries to decapitate another kid with a sword, then that kid has serious mental issues and the parents need to take that kid to a psychiatrist. Besides, kids can't buy rated M games and the parents are entirely responsible for what the kid plays, so it's their fault if the kid becomes a ****head and wants to kill others.

I mean, I grew up hooked on MK and mass murdering an entire city in GTA, and you don't see me bringing guns to school and shooting up the place

 

[fkacyan]

I might be reading between the lines a bit too much, but could this finally be a sign that the government won't try to regulate morality?!

 

[theeboredone]

It's true parents are responsible at the end of the day if kids can buy Mature rated games like MK or CoD. That's why I figure there should be some sort of penalty enforced on not the gaming industry, but the parents were anything to ever get out of hand. I'm not talking about a school shooting, as simply as much as some kid who looks up to Kratos as a bad *** mofo, and figures the best way to solve a problem in school is the knock out some kid.

@Fuelbi

Video games like MK CAN have an impact on child-pre-teen development. It's those years when we absorb so much more information, and are easily influenced by what we are exposed to. Like I said, I'm not saying a kid is gonna go out, start shooting people, but if a soldier in CoD says "**** you", and then I later hear a 12 year old kid say it to me...that either tells me the parents use it around the house, or he got it from another influence. I mean, how many stories or complaints you've heard from gamers complaining about lil kids on voice chat during a CoD game cursing and *****ing about everything? While they deem it as simply annoying, there is an underlying problem in terms of why the hell are they even playing this game in the first place?

Personally, it's more of a judgment call on the parents. If they believe their children are mature enough to handle these kinda games. My threshold would be around the 15-16 range before I start letting them play those kinda games. Anytime before that, children can easily take video games as a sort of influence on their personality.

 

[OmegaXXII]

I bet alot of soccer aren't going to like this, if they haven't found out about at least.

But theboredone did bring up a good point, bloody gore games and mass shooters do have an impact on pre-teens, if they see such acts it's due to that influence that someday they would even consider such an idea that otherwise they would have never thought of.

But personally, I don't give a **** since I always thought games like Mortal Kombat and Duke Nukem were cool when I was growing up, it just had that cool feeling since most older people played it.

 

[Poltergust]

I also agree with Bored. I don't think I even touched M-rated games until I was like 14, so I wasn't affected by them at all. It's up to the parents to relegate what their children play. The gaming industry should take no responsibility over something that is easily controllable by their parents. We have the ESRB for a reason, you know. It works the same way with movies and their rating system as well.

Very good news, though. I was worried when I heard about this case last year. I'm glad it was resolved this way.

 

[Fuelbi]

If video games have the effect on kids then why aren't movies, television, and books as talked about as video games? I'm pretty sure if you watch something like idk The Terminator or Rambo or something idk I'm not a movie person, then why the hell don't you see kids using that as their excuse to beat up kids? I'm pretty sure if a kid wanted to be just like Arnold, the kid would go around beating kids up if movies had the same effect as they do on video games

 

[F8AL]

Glad to hear the outcome of this.

 

[theeboredone]

Well that's all part of the consideration. I mean I can say personally, my parents didn't let me see a PG-13 movie until I was 13, and they would always switch the channel if any violence or sex came up on TV.

Really, all I had to go off was Power Rangers, Batman, Gargoyles, and all those other shows.

However, I have read studies that shows involving "super heroes" per say like the ones mentioned generally stimulate child development in a positive way as it expands their creativity more than anything else. If I had to guess, I figure those shows have more to do with teaching a "lesson" or "moral" at the end of the episode as opposed to Terminator who as kids see, as some robot killing everything he sees.

And besides, video games are more "engaging". Holding a controller, playing a guy with a gun that you have control over. Being able to press a button that triggers a gun shot. It's the kid resulting the character to shoot, in turn someone is dying. It's more "hands on". Studies do show that video games also help with a child's creativity, but I digress and go back to my earlier view on how young kids viewing and having such control over these things can result in it playing a influential part in their personality.

 

[SonicBOOM XS]

Well that's all part of the consideration. I mean I can say personally, my parents didn't let me see a PG-13 movie until I was 13, and they would always switch the channel if any violence or sex came up on TV.

Really, all I had to go off was Power Rangers, Batman, Gargoyles, and all those other shows.

However, I have read studies that shows involving "super heroes" per say like the ones mentioned generally stimulate child development in a positive way as it expands their creativity more than anything else. If I had to guess, I figure those shows have more to do with teaching a "lesson" or "moral" at the end of the episode as opposed to Terminator who as kids see, as some robot killing everything he sees.

And besides, video games are more "engaging". Holding a controller, playing a guy with a gun that you have control over. Being able to press a button that triggers a gun shot. It's the kid resulting the character to shoot, in turn someone is dying. It's more "hands on". Studies do show that video games also help with a child's creativity, but I digress and go back to my earlier view on how young kids viewing and having such control over these things can result in it playing a influential part in their personality.

I agree with theeboredone.

Video games are, as a whole, interactive experiences. Now, if you see someone punch another dude in a movie, it might entice the child to do it if he sees it enough or if the good guy does it. Now, in a game, it's much more interactive and gives you a feeling. So if the child in question punches someone in a game, he knows how it feels and it may make him do it again.

Need a better explanation? A 10-year old doped on COD. If he saw Rambo doing the same thing, it wouldn't be as enticing, especially since it's probably going to get Rambo in trouble. If he actually did it himself in COD, and got REWARDED for it, he's going to like it more and eventually, it might affect him totally.

theeboredone put it better though.

 

[GunmasterLombardi]

I was scared of games like Resident Evil when I was 6, but I grew up quickly and played those games a few years later.

 

[theeboredone]

^ I don't enjoy playing horror games by myself. I prefer watching them though. Playing them on my own can get me scared ****less, but if I'm just spectating...not so bad. Again..."hands on" approach.

Same thing with horror movies. **** is hilarious, but I be damned if I had a "controller" and was controlling a character's fate.

 

[finalark]

Because they're under constitutional protection, this also means that video games are considered art now, right?

 

[UltiMario]

Art in the broadest form of the word, I suppose.

 

[Fuelbi]

Because they're under constitutional protection, this also means that video games are considered art now, right?

I suppose if you count games made by indie developers which could be considered "art"

Well I guess you're right as well guys. I really do wish that'd they'd see violent games as a positive thing as well. Studies showed that therapists who gave their patients games like GTA for anger management and the likes found ways of relieving their stress with games like these

 

[Life]

Pretty much every study done on the correlation between violence in video games and violence IRL has whatever results the people who paid for it want to see, frankly.

Also Gamestop will likely still check your ID, they just can't be forced to do it by the government anymore.

 

[Pluvia]

We don't have free speech laws like you but we don't need to bring cases like this to court because the outcome would be the same as yours.

 

[UberMario]

Art in the broadest form of the word, I suppose.

I'm not sure why you are considering it to be art in only the broadest form of the word. Modelling is a form of art, the background music is definitely art, developing the worlds is art, storytelling is art, and any 2D elements are absolutely art.

 

[disasterABDUL]

lets be honest here
if this case was won then they would also have to make a case that television causes violence
because although there are parental controls for tv, its easier for a child to find something violent on tv as opposed to acquiring a violent video game
regardless of the fact that some video games are way more violent than whats on common tv channels.
So I wasn't too worried that this would turn out bad

 

[Luigitoilet]

Because they're under constitutional protection, this also means that video games are considered art now, right?

I would say "entertainment", "media" or "design" over straight up "art" for the most part.

 

[OmegaXXII]

lets be honest here
if this case was won then they would also have to make a case that television causes violence
because although there are parental controls for tv, its easier for a child to find something violent on tv as opposed to acquiring a violent video game
regardless of the fact that some video games are way more violent than whats on common tv channels.

I have to say, while a child may stumble upon a random channel, the fact is that the child isn't going to be as impacted as opposed a video game which is more hands on, meaning if a child sees someone get shot in a movie it will be like meh.... But if you're talking about Duke Nukem and that same child kills so someone in the game and gets rewarded fir it, it will leave some kind of impression because of it being 'hands on'.

But ultimetly, even if such a law were to be created for movies, television etc. parents would still have to put some kind of effort to avoiding such things.

vgfg

 

[Poltergust]

The reason why this case came up in the first place is because parents weren't putting any effort into monitoring what their kids play. >_>

 

[disasterABDUL]

heaven forbid parents get blamed for parenting

 

[theeboredone]

Well I said earlier the onus should be on parents were anything to go bad.