![[Home]](/graphics/button-home.gif)
![[About Me]](/graphics/button-about_me.gif)
![[The Daleisphere]](/graphics/button-the-daleisphere.gif)
![[Video Game Law]](/graphics/button-vgl.gif)
![[iMedia Law]](/graphics/button-imedia_law.gif)
![[wishhh.com]](/graphics/button_wishhh.gif)
![[Filler Bar]](/graphics/button_filler.gif)
Category — Violent Game Law Cases
8th Circuit Upholds Permanent Injunction Against Minnesota’s Law Restricting Video Game Sales/Rentals to Minors
Categories: Violent Game Law Cases
ESA v. Minnesota (March 17, 2008 – 8th Cir Court of Appeals)
Click to hear Oral Arguments on Appeal (Feb 12, 2007)
Text of Appeal (Aug 29, 2006)
Permanent Injunction (July 31, 2006 – District Court)
Text of Complaint (June 6, 2006)
Text of Enjoined Bill (May 22, 2006)
In another of a long line of such U.S. First Amendment video game cases, The United States 8th Circuit upheld the July 2006 permanent injunction enjoining Minnesota from enforcing a law that would have: (i) imposed $25 fines on children under 17 who bought or rented video games rated M (Mature) or AO (Adults only); and (ii) required retailers to post signs informing consumers of the law. The appellate court’s reasoning was as follows:
- Video games are protected free speech (as per Interactive Digital Software Ass’n v St. Louis County, 329 F.3d 954, 958 (8th Cir. 2003)).
- As such, video game rental/purchase restrictions imposed by law must pass the ‘strict scrutiny‘ test, namely the law must: (i) be necessary to serve a compelling state interest; and (ii) be narrowly tailored to achieve that end.
- The state argued that the compelling interest at stake was that of ‘safeguarding the psychological well being and moral and ethical development of minors’.
- While the interest may be compelling in the abstract, in order to prevail the state must provide real and empirical support for its belief that ‘violent’ video games cause such harm – not merely conjecture.
- The court agreed that Minnesota offered substantial evidence in support of its contention that video games cause such harm, but nonetheless ruled that the evidence fell short of the statistical certainty of causation required by the Interactive decision.
Digg 
Del.icio.us Take Two Settles with Jack Thompson
Categories: "Inside Baseball" • Jack Thompson • Settlements • Violent Game Law Cases
Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release (April 17, 2007)
Text of Amended Answer and Counterclaim (March 28, 2007)
- amended to remove all but one paragraph of the counterclaim
Text of Original Answer and Counterclaim (March 21, 2007)
Text of Complaint (March 13, 2007)
Take-Two and Jack Thompson have settled their GTA IV/Manhunt 2 suit and counter suit. Thompson has agreed:
- not to sue or threaten to sue over the sale and distribution of ANY game – not just Manhunt 2 and GTA IV as sought in the original complaint – designed, published, manufactured, distributed or sold by Take-Two, its affiliates, subsidiaries etc.;
- not to threaten such suits; and
- to communicate with Take-Two only through its lawyers.
However, Thompson will still be free to criticize the content and distribution of such games and to represent third-party plaintiffs in actions against Take-Two, its affiliates, subsidiaries etc. alleging individual harm.
Dale’s Comment: It is odd for a settlement to contain an explicit agreement to limit communication with an opposing party to communication through counsel as the rules of professional conduct in most jurisdictions specifically prohibit lawyers from communicating directly with persons represented by counsel.
Jack Thompson Countersues Take-Two
Categories: "Inside Baseball" • Jack Thompson • Violent Game Law Cases
Text of Amended Answer and Counterclaim (March 28, 2007)
- amended to remove all but one paragraph of the counterclaim
Text of Original Answer and Counterclaim (March 21, 2007)
Text of Complaint (March 13, 2007)
In response to last-week’s Take-Take-Two law-suit seeking to preemptively stop him from bringing suit:
- to stop the sale and distribution of Manhunt 2 (due out in the summer of 2007) and GTA IV (due out in October 2007); and
- seeking pre-publication review of the games;
as he did in the past with Bully, Thompson has predictably brought a countersuit accusing Take-Two of racketeering and violation of his civil rights.Astonishingly, Thompson, in the original counterclaim (subsequently amended), Thompson accused Take-Two of conspiring with prominent online gaming publications GamePolitics, Kotaku, Spong, Joystiq, Gamespot, IGN, Game Informer, Electronic Gaming Weekly, Penny Arcade, and others to commit racketeering activities!Specifically, Thompson originally claimed that such “conspiracy” violated section 18 USC 241 which states, in part:
If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in ny State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or njoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same;… They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both;
Wow, this is, err, novel! As noted by GamePolitics.com, however, Thompson subsequently amended the counterclaim from 20 pages down to the following single pargraph:
If the court finds that it has jurisdiction over this matter, it should review the video games in question, allow a review of those games by this defendant and then hear argument if requested by this defendant as to wherein the Plaintiff should be enjoined from distributing video games to minors.
Oral Arguments in Minnesota Video Game Law Appeal Begin
Categories: Violent Game Law Cases
ESA v. Minnesota (March 17, 2008 – 8th Cir Court of Appeals)
Click to hear Oral Arguments on Appeal (Feb 12, 2007)
Text of Appeal (Aug 29, 2006)
Permanent Injunction (July 31, 2006 – District Court)
Text of Complaint (June 6, 2006)
Text of Enjoined Bill (May 22, 2006)
The United States 8th Circuit begins hearing oral arguments today in Minnesota’s appeal of a District Court ruling that its 2006 “fine the buyer” video game statute was unconstitutional. A permanent injunction against Minnesota’s violent video game bill was granted in July 2006.
The law would have imposed $25 fines on children under 17 who bought or rented video games rated M (Mature) or AO (Adults only). The trial judge found that Minnesota was “…entirely incapable of showing a causal link between the playing of video games and any deleterious effect on the psychological, moral, or ethical well-being of minors [p. 7] …absent compelling evidence, the belief is pure conjecture”. [p. 13] Accordingly, the bill failed the strict scrutiny test necessary to survive a First Amendment challenge.
Sources: GamePolitics
GamePolitics Full Coverage Of Minnesota’s Violent Video Game Law
Germany Restricts Crackdown Sales
Categories: Game Bans • Game Ratings • Violent Game Law Cases
Along with Gears of War and Dead Rising before it, Germany’s USK has decided not to rate the video Crackdown. The result is not a total game ban. However, the game cannot be sold to minors, cannot be marketed in Germany and stores cannot display it on racks. Rather, it can only be sold to adults from under the counter.
Dale’s Comment: Crackdown has been one of my most enjoyed 360 games in the first quarter of 2007. Importantly, the May 16 Halo 3 public demo of will only be available to a select few and those that purchase specially marked Crackddown units. There will be more than a few disappointed minors in Germany looking forward to playing the Halo 3 public demo.
Sources: GameSpot | GamePolitics.com | Business Week
Unconstitutional Video Game Laws Cost States $1.5 Million – So Far!
Categories: Violent Game Law Cases
As violent video game laws are overturned by the courts one after the other, attorneys’ fee awards are mounting.
Attorney fee awards to date include:
- Illinois – $510,000
- Indianapolis – $318,000
- St. Louis County – $180,000
- Washington – $344,000
- Michigan – $180,000
- Minnesota – $73,000
- Louisiana – $157,000
Sources: Law.com | GamePolitics.com
Related posts:
- Unconstitutional Video Game Laws Cost States $1.5 Million – So Far! (January 4, 2007)
- ESA Wins its Bid for Cost Award from illinois Game Bill Fight (August 12, 2006)
- ESA Seeks Legal Cost from Illinois Game Bill Fight (March 16, 2006)
Proposed German Law would Criminalize Violent Video Game Makers and Gamers
Categories: Violent Game Law Cases • Violent Game Laws
This story has been floating around the gaming sites for weeks. I haven’t covered it because I can’t imagine that such a proposed bill will ever become law. But, since the L.A. Times is now covering it, I thought I’d at least mention it in passing.
A proposed Bavarian and Lower Saxony law would impose fines and possible jail sentences for up to one year on game developers, distributors and game players of games in which the goal is to inflict “cruel violence on humans or human-looking characters.” This is so broad so as to include a huge swath of popular video games today.
Dale’s Comment: As a blog policy, I typically don’t comment on draft bill because most of them never become law. If you are interested in this type of coverage, GamePolitics.com is for you! Again, I will be flabbergasted if such an extreme law ever sees the light of day in Germany. Of course if this amounts to anything I’ll cover it here.
Sources: L.A. Times | GamePolitics.com | Gamasutra
China to Police Online Games
Categories: Agency/Board Actions • Censorship • Violent Game Law Cases
China will police online games to ensure legality and suitability of content. Game distributors must first get approval to release new games. They will be responsible for detailed monthly reporting and to ensure operators do not add illegal or improper content.
The latest crackdown was prompted by “a rash of problems with imported online games, some of which contain sensitive religious material or refer to territorial disputes,” Xinhua said. It said some were criticized as pornographic or too violent.
Sources: Gamasutra | China View | ABC News | Fox News (AP)
Federal District Court Judge Makes Louisiana’s Violent Game Bill Injunction Permanent
Categories: Decisions • Injunctions • Jack Thompson • Violent Game Law Cases
Text of Short Summary Judgment Ruling (November 29, 2006)
Text of Preliminary Injunction (August 25, 2006)
Text of Temporary Restraining Order
Text of ESA Complaint
Text of Violent Game Bill (HB 1381)
Hot on the heals of the 7th Circuit’s upholding the permanent injunction against Illinois’ Safe Games Illinois Act’, Federal District Court Judge James Brady issued a bench ruling permanently (followed by this short summary judgment ruling) enjoining the application of Louisiana’s, Jack Thompson-drafted, Violent Game Bill.
ESA’s response to the ruling:
“What makes Judge Brady’s action unusual and remarkable is that he issued his ruling from the bench rather than through a written decision, a strong signal that he felt the State’s arguments were so without merit that they didn’t even require a detailed opinion beyond the Judge’s August decision imposing the preliminary injunction. In his August ruling, the Judge emphasized the State’s failure to take into consideration when passing this law the long line of previous cases holding that video games are protected speech. The ESA will immediately file to recover its legal fees from the State as it has successfully done elsewhere.”
“In nine out of nine cases, federal courts have struck down these grandstanding efforts by politicians to ban video game sales to minors. It doesn’t get clearer than that. One hopes that enough is enough. Video games are like rock and roll: they’re here to stay, and it’s about time for elected officials to focus their energies, and taxpayer dollars, on truly productive and useful programs to educate parents to use the tools industry has made available — from ESRB ratings to parental control technologies.”
Sources: GamePolitics.com | Gamespot |ars technica | GameDaily.biz | Gamasutra
Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Upholds Permanent Injunction Against ‘Safe Games Illinois Act’
Categories: Decisions • Injunctions • Sexuality Cases • Violent Game Law Cases
- 7th Circuit Court of Appeal Ruling ESA v. Illinois Decision (November 27, 2006)
- Lower Court Ruling in ESA v. Illinois Decision (December 2, 2005)
- Text of Rejected Act
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has upheld the prior Illinois District Court permanent injunction against the implementation of Illinois’ “Safe Game Illinois Act” that provided for two new criminal laws, the Violent Video Games Law and the Sexually Explicit Video Games Law. Illinois had not appealed the Violent Video Games Law portion of the earlier decision. The Court of Appeal held that the Sexually Explicit Video Games Portion of the Law swept too broadly:
The game God of War… is illustrative of this point. Because the (Illinois law) potentially criminalizes the sale of any game that features exposed breasts, without concern for the game considered in its entirety or for the game’s social value for minors, distribution of God of War is potentially illegal, in spite of the fact that the game tracks the Homeric epics in content and theme. As we have suggested in the past, there is serious reason to believe that a statute sweeps too broadly when it prohibits a game that is essentially an interactive, digital version of the Odyssey.
Similarly, it seems unlikely that a statute is narrowly tailored to achieving the stated compelling interest when it potentially criminalizes distribution of works featuring only brief flashes of nudity.
The Court of Appeal also held that the portion of the law requiring a 4″ warning sticker in addition to the ESRB warning was not sufficiently narrowly tailored.
According to Next Generation (and other sources), the state has not yet paid the $150,000+ legal costs that the court awarded to ESA on August 12, 2006.
Sources: Gamasutra | GameSpot | GameDaily.biz | GamePolitics.com | ars technica | CNet| Chicago Tribune | First Amendment Center | Media Law Prof
Preliminary Injunction Granted Against Oklahoma ‘Games as Porn’ Law
Categories: Decisions • Injunctions • Violent Game Law Cases
Text of Preliminary Injunction
Text of Law (HB 3004)
As expected, the Oklahoma law that would make it a felony for anyone to sell, rent or display games which contain “inappropriate violence”, has been enjoined. The law would require stores to keep such games hidden in a similar manner to pornographic magazines and videos. The law was set to go into effect on November 1, 2006.
Sources: Gamasutra | GameDaily.biz | ars technica | Law.com | GameSpot | Next Generation | GamePolitics.com
GamePolitics.com Full Coverage of Oklahoma ‘Games as Porn’ Law
Related Posts:
- Preliminary Injunction Granted Against Oklahoma ‘Games as Porn’ Law (October 12, 2006)
- ESA/EMA Sues Oklahoma over ‘Game as Porn’ Law (June 23, 2006)
- Oklahoma ‘Games as Porn’ Bill Signed into Law – ESA to Fight it (June 12, 2006)
Minnesota Appeals Video Game Law Permanent Injunction
Categories: Injunctions • Violent Game Law Cases
ESA v. Minnesota (March 17, 2008 – 8th Cir Court of Appeals)
Click to hear Oral Arguments on Appeal (Feb 12, 2007)
Text of Appeal (Aug 29, 2006)
Permanent Injunction (July 31, 2006 – District Court)
Text of Complaint (June 6, 2006)
Text of Enjoined Bill (May 22, 2006)
Minnesota Attorney General Mike Hatch is appealing the last month’s permanent injunction against Minnesota’s violent video game bill.
Sources: GamePolitics 1 | GamePolitics 2 | GameDaily.biz | GameSpot | Gamasutra | 1Up.com | Next Generation
GamePolitics Full Coverage Of Minnesota’s Violent Video Game Law
Preliminary Injunction Granted Against Louisiana Violent Game Bill
Categories: Injunctions • Violent Game Law Cases
Text of Preliminary Injunction
Text of Temporary Restraining Order
Text of ESA Complaint
Text of Violent Game Bill (HB 1381)
No surprise here yet again. Jack Thompson’s violent game bill, criminalizing sales of violent video games to minors, designed to be immune from constitutional challenge – isn’t. Here are a few choice excerpts from Federal District Court Judge James Brady’s decision:
“The State’s argument overlooks a line of cases holding that video games are protected free speech…”
“Defendants (Louisiana) contend that the legislative record contains social science evidence demonstrating that violent video games are harmful. It appears that much of the same evidence has been considered by numerous courts and in each case the connection was found to be tenuous and speculative…”
“The evidence that was submitted to the legislature in connection with the bill that became the statute is sparse and could hardly be called in any sense reliable…”
“Absent an injunction the statute will have a chilling effect on both video game developers and retailers.”.
Sources: GamePolitics.com | Gamasutra | GameDaily.biz | ZDNet | ars technica | Next Generation | Joystiq | MSNBC | CBS (AP)
ESA Wins its Bid for Cost Award from Illinois Game Bill Fight
Categories: Violent Game Law Cases
Back in March, the Entertainment Software Association and Video Software Dealers Association had petitioned Judge Kennelly in the United States District Court, asking him to order the State of Illinois to pay $644,545 in legal fees, for its unsuccessful effort to enact a law banning the sale of violent video games in the state. On August 11, the judge ordered Illinois to pay a $510,528.64 cost award.
Sources: Gamasutra | IGN | L.A. Times | GameSpy | 1Up.com | GameDaily.biz | GamePolitics.com | Next Generation | CBS (AP)
GamePolitics Full Coverage of Illinois Game Law
Louisiana Motion Filed To Introduce Minnesota Permanent Injunction Decision
Categories: Violent Game Law Cases
Text of Preliminary Injunction
Text of Temporary Restraining Order
Text of ESA Complaint
Text of Violent Game Bill (HB 1381)
Lawyers for the ESA have introduced a motion to the Louisiana Court to admit the text of Minnesota’s July 31 permanent injunction decision arguing that the decision “adds to the overwhelming precedent in favor of preliminarily enjoining [Louisiana's law] on First Amendment grounds.
Source: GamePolitics.com
Minnesota’s Violent Video Game Law Overturned – Permanent Injunction Granted
Categories: Injunctions • Violent Game Law Cases
Text of ESA v. Minnesota Permanent Injunction
Text of Complaint
Text of Bill
No surprise here. Yet another State law designed to restrict minors’ access to violent video games has been struck down as unconstitutional. As per Judge James M. Rosenbaum, “…the Act unconstitutionally impinges on expressions protected by the First Amendment…”. The law, set to go into effect on August 1, would have imposed $25 fines on children under 17 who bought or rented video games rated M (Mature) or AO (Adults only). As was the case in other jurisdictions where similarly intentioned laws were struck down, the judge found that Minnesota was “…entirely incapable of showing a causal link between the playing of video games and any deleterious effect on the psychological, moral, or ethical well-being of minors [p. 7] …absent compelling evidence, the belief is pure conjecture”. [p. 13] Accordingly, the bill failed the strict scrutiny test necessary to survive a First Amendment challenge.
Dale’s Comment: For those keeping track: (i) similar laws in Michigan, Washington State, Illinois, Indianapolis and St. Louis have been ruled unconstitutional and permanently enjoined; (ii) a similar law in California has been temporarily enjoined; (iii) similar laws in Louisiana and Oklahoma are currently being challenged in courts and likely to receive the same fate; (iv) several other states (Florida, Delaware, Maryland, Indiana) have similar laws pending final enactment; and (v) Senators Clinton and Lieberman introduced similar federal legislation to Congress last year.
Sources: Gamasutra | GameSpot | ars technica | Next Generation | Joystiq | GameDaily.biz | GamePolitics.com | 1Up.com | Minnesota Star Tribune | Kotaku | First Amendment Central | CNet | IGN | USA Today (AP)
GamePolitics Full Coverage Of Minnesota’s Violent Video Game Law
Jack Thompson’s Louisiana Amicus Curiae Motion Rejected
Categories: Jack Thompson • Violent Game Law Cases
A Federal District Court Judge denied controversial lawyer, Jack Thompson’s, motion to file an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) brief in the ESA case challenging the recently passed (and recently enjoined) Louisiana Violent Video Game Bill – a bill he helped to write.
Source: GamePolitics.com
Federal Judge Hears Arguments in ESA v. Minnesota Case
Categories: Violent Game Law Cases
ESA v. Minnesota (March 17, 2008 – 8th Cir Court of Appeals)
Click to hear Oral Arguments on Appeal (Feb 12, 2007)
Text of Appeal (Aug 29, 2006)
Permanent Injunction (July 31, 2006 – District Court)
Text of Complaint (June 6, 2006)
Text of Enjoined Bill (May 22, 2006)
Federal District Court Judge Rosenbaum has begun hearing arguments in the ESA v. Minnesota case, just one of the ongoing cases between the video game industry and U.S. states imposing restrictions on the sale/rental of violent video games to children. The challenged Minnesota bill is set to go into force on August 1. It imposes fines on children that buy/rent video games. It is widely expected that this law will be held to be unconstitutional like similar bills of other states that have failed before it. In an interesting twist to this story, Judge Rosenbaum has installed an XBox in his chambers so he can view/play some of the violent video games in question.
Sources: Game Politics | Gamasutra | Associated Press | San Jose Mercury News (AP) | GameIndustry.biz
GamePolitics Full Coverage Of Minnesota’s Violent Video Game Law
Judge Hears Arguments on Louisiana Violent Video Games Law
Categories: Violent Game Law Cases
Text of Violent Game Bill (HB 1381)
Text of ESA Complaint
Text of Temporary Restraining Order
U.S. District Judge James Brady took the has extended the temporary restraining order he issued on June 20 barring authorities from enforcing the measure and continues to hear arguments in the case. Based on the hearing to date, it appears Judge Brady will make the same ruling striking down the law as unconstitutionally restrictive of free speech as was the case in several other jurisdictions. He is expected to rule next week.
Sources: Gamasutra | Shreveport Times | The Advocate | 10 KLFY | Nola.com (AP) | GamePolitics.com
Insomniac President Files Brief in Louisiana Constitutional Suit
Categories: Violent Game Law Cases
Text of Price’s Brief
Insomniac Games‘ President Ted Price argues that games are as much a means of expression as books, movies and music. He fears that many games might be criminalized under the law’s broad definition of violence. He explains how his own best-selling Ratchet & Clank series might fall under the provisions of the Louisiana statute.
Sources: GamePolitics.com | GameDaily.biz | Gamasutra | Next Generation | IGN | GameSpy | 1Up.com | Advanced Media Network
ESA/EMA Sues Oklahoma over ‘Games as Porn’ Law
Categories: Violent Game Law Cases
Text of Law (HB 3004)
As expected, ESA and EMA filed suit in Oklahoma, asking that the state’s new video game law be overturned.
Sources: ESA Press Release | GameDaily.com | CGW | GameIndustry.biz | GameSpot | afterdawn.com | GamePolitics.com | Advanced Media Network
GamePolitics.com Full Coverage of Oklahoma ‘Games as Porn’ Law
Related Posts:
- Preliminary Injunction Granted Against Oklahoma ‘Games as Porn’ Law (October 12, 2006)
- ESA/EMA Sues Oklahoma over ‘Game as Porn’ Law (June 23, 2006)
- Oklahoma ‘Games as Porn’ Bill Signed into Law – ESA to Fight it (June 12, 2006)
District Judge Temporarily Blocks Louisiana’s Violent Game Bill
Categories: Injunctions • Violent Game Law Cases
Text of Temporary Restraining Order
In response to an ESA/EMA initiated law suit filed immediately after the bill was signed into law, U.S. District Judge James Brady has issued a temporary restraining order blocking the recently passed Louisiana violent game bill from being put into effect.
Sources: Gamasutra | GameSpot | joystiq | Next Generation | GameDaily.biz | GameIndustry.biz | CNet (Reuters) | Fox News (Reuters) | Macworld | Spong | Reuters | Jurist | GameSpy | ars technica | GameSpy | IGN | GamePolitics
Louisiana Violent Game Bill Signed Into Law – ESA Files Suit
Categories: Violent Game Law Cases • Violent Game Laws
Text of Violent Game Bill (HB 1381)
Text of ESA Complaint
This new bill (HB 1381) drafted by controversial Florida attorney Jack Thompson, allows a judge to rule on whether or not a video game meets established criteria for being inappropriate for minors. A person found guilty of selling such a game to a minor would face fines ranging from $100 to $2,000, plus a prison term of up to one year. The ESA immediately filed suit.
Dale’s Comment: Jack Thompson has drafted HB 1381 in a way that tries to respond to the First Amendment issues that brought down similar laws in other jurisdictions. It is drafted in such a way to use the same legal standard by which obscenity is determined – the Miller test. The Miller test defines obscenity as something that “by contemporary community standards appeals to the prurient interest; depicts sexual content specifically defined by state law in a patently offensive way; and lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value”. The Miller hasn’t, to my knowledge, been used in cases that attempt to uphold the constitutionality of legislation controlling depictions of violence.
Sources: Gamasutra | GamePolitics | GameSpot 1 | GameSpot 2 | Next Generation | Macworld | Reuters | GameDaily.biz | Muskogee Phoenix (Editorial) | ESA Press Release | joystiq | Link | Link | Advanced Media Network
Oklahoma ‘Games As Porn’ Bill Signed Into Law – ESA to Fight It
Categories: Sexuality Cases • Violent Game Law Cases • Violent Game Laws
Text of Law (HB 3004)
Here we go again! This law redefines a list of items, such as hardcore pornography, which are deemed “harmful to minors”, to include video games which use “inappropriate violence”.The new law will make it a felony for anyone in Oklahoma to sell, rent or display games which contain inappropriate violence. Stores must keep such games hidden in a similar manner to pornographic magazines and videos. The law ignores the ESRB age rating for games, and instead makes its own definition of inappropriate violence. The law is due to come into force on November 1, 2006. The ESA has already launched a constitutional challenge to the law which is likely to succeed based on the experience of similar challenges in other jurisdictions.
Sources: Gamasutra | GamePolitics.com | Governor Henry’s Press Release | GameSpot | GameIndustry.biz | Next Generation | GameDaily.biz | joystiq
ESA to Fight: Gamasutra | GamePolitics.com | GameSpot | GameIndustry.biz | Next Generation | 1Up.com | ars technica | Business Week
Note: Oklahoma becomes the eighth U.S. jurisdiction to enact such a law. Previous laws in Washington State, Illinois, St. Louis, Indianapolis and Michigan were held unconstitutional. California’s video game law is currently under review. Minnesota’s bill was signed into law last week.
GamePolitics.com Full Coverage of Oklahoma ‘Games as Porn’ Law
Related Posts:
- Preliminary Injunction Granted Against Oklahoma ‘Games as Porn’ Law (October 12, 2006)
- ESA/EMA Sues Oklahoma over ‘Game as Porn’ Law (June 23, 2006)
- Oklahoma ‘Games as Porn’ Bill Signed into Law – ESA to Fight it (June 12, 2006)
ESA Files Suit Against Minnesota Game Law
Categories: Violent Game Law Cases
ESA v. Minnesota (March 17, 2008 – 8th Cir Court of Appeals)
Click to hear Oral Arguments on Appeal (Feb 12, 2007)
Text of Appeal (Aug 29, 2006)
Permanent Injunction (July 31, 2006 – District Court)
Text of Complaint (June 6, 2006)
Text of Enjoined Bill (May 22, 2006)
As expected, the ESA has announced that it has challenged the Constitutionality of the new Minnesota bill that would fine children under age seventeen $25 for buying or renting video mature or adults only rated games – on the grounds that it infringes upon their First Amendment rights.
Sources: ESA Press Release | Gamasutra | GameDaily.biz | GamePolitics.com | Next Generation | Washington Post (Reuters) | ign.com | 1Up.com | GameSpot | GameIndustry.biz | ars technica
GamePolitics Full Coverage Of Minnesota’s Violent Video Game Law
