Category — Policy Analysis

Gamasutra Feature: Litigations that Changed Games Industry

December 20, 2006 at 2:03 pm - by Dale Dietrich

Categories: Featured Articles • Policy Analysis

Gamasutra Feature: Litigations that Changed Games Industry by Gregory Boyd

A related article is “My Three Trials” by Bill Kunkel where he describes his experiences as an expert witness in three historic video game trials. The Article is in three pieces:

Part 1 – Atari v. Magnavox
Part 2 – Nintendo v. Galoob
Part 3 – Capcom v. Data East

Digg Del.icio.us 464No Comments2006-12-20+19%3A03%3A50Dale+Dietrich

Congressman Joe Pitts Claims his Video Game Comments were Misportrayed in Daily Show Lampoon

July 8, 2006 at 2:42 pm - by Dale Dietrich

Categories: Game Ratings • Humour • Legal Reform • Policy Analysis • Violent Game Laws

After raising many eyebrows with his comments, Congressman Joe Pitts claims his statements on the affects of violent video games on children aired in a June 22 Daily Show segment were misportrayed.

Sources: DailyLocal.com | GamePolitics | Joystiq | YouTube Video (snippet)

Click here to view YouTube video.

Dale’s Comment: It’s hard to understand how Congressman’s Pitt’s comments could have been misportrayed. They were aired uncut. This is simply another example of a (probably) well intentioned, aging, out of touch Senator speaking on a subject he does not understand. Sounds like Washington as usual to me.

Related Posts:

Congressman Joe Pitts Claims his Video Game Comments were Misportrayed in Daily Show Lampoon (July 8, 2006)
Jon Stewart on Congressional Debate over Video Games (June 22, 2006)

Digg Del.icio.us 336No Comments2006-07-08+18%3A42%3A49Dale+Dietrich

Jon Stewart on Congressional Debate over Video Games

June 22, 2006 at 7:43 pm - by Dale Dietrich

Categories: Game Ratings • Humour • Legal Reform • Policy Analysis • Violent Game Laws

In this Daily Show clip, Jon Stewart lampoons Congressman Joe Pitts’ Lack of understanding of the video game industry, affects of violence on children and the ESRB rating system.

Sources: YouTube Video (snippet) | joystiq | GamePolitics | Gamasutra | GameIndustry.biz

Click here to view YouTube video.

Related Posts:

Congressman Joe Pitts Claims his Video Game Comments were Misportrayed in Daily Show Lampoon (July 8, 2006)
Jon Stewart on Congressional Debate over Video Games (June 22, 2006)

Digg Del.icio.us 323No Comments2006-06-22+23%3A43%3A29Dale+Dietrich

Congress, FTC Discuss Video Game Rating System

June 15, 2006 at 7:33 pm - by Dale Dietrich

Categories: Legal Reform • Policy Analysis

The House Subcommittee on Energy and Commerce is holding hearings on the subject of regulating video game sales. The central issue was how well the current video game rating system is working and whether children were able to buy M-rated games and access inappropriate content.

Sources: ars technica | ZDNet | ABC News | Washington Post (Reuters) | 1Up.com | Gamasutra | Business Week | GamePolitics.com | GameSpot

GamePolitics.com’s Full Coverage Video Game Legislative Activities in Congress
Related Posts:

Congressman Joe Pitts Claims his Video Game Comments were Misportrayed in Daily Show Lampoon (July 8, 2006)
Jon Stewart on Congressional Debate over Video Games (June 22, 2006)
Congress, FTC Discuss Video Game Rating System (June 15, 2006)
Views Clash at Senate Game Hearing (April 3, 2006)
Regulating Youth Access to Violent video Games: Three Responses to First Amendment Concerns (March 29, 2006)
Senate Panel OKs Video Game Study (March 8, 2006)
U.S. Family Entertainment Act Introduced in Congress (December 16, 2005)
IEMA & ESA Respond to Clinton & Lieberman Family Entertainment Protection Act (November 30, 2005)
Senators Clinton & Lieberman Introduce Federal Game Regulation (November 29, 2005)
CAMRA Bill Introduced in House of Representatives (October 25, 2005)
Juvenile Violent Crime Decreases in last 10 Years (October 11, 2005)

Digg Del.icio.us 318No Comments2006-06-15+23%3A33%3A54Dale+Dietrich

Views Clash at Senate Game Hearing

April 3, 2006 at 4:44 pm - by Dale Dietrich

Categories: Policy Analysis • Violent Game Laws

A U.S. Senate’s Judiciary Subcommittee held a hearing designed to publicly discuss the issue of laws restricting game sales. Titled “What’s in a Game? Regulation of Violent Video Games and the First Amendment,” the hearing saw two panels of four testify on the impact violent video games have on children and how games are–or aren’t–protected as free speech under the U.S. Constitution

Sources: Next Generation | GameSpot | Gamasutra | GameDaily.biz | GamePolitics.com

GamePolitics.com’s Full Coverage Video Game Legislative Activities in Congress
Related Posts:

Congressman Joe Pitts Claims his Video Game Comments were Misportrayed in Daily Show Lampoon (July 8, 2006)
Jon Stewart on Congressional Debate over Video Games (June 22, 2006)
Congress, FTC Discuss Video Game Rating System (June 15, 2006)
Views Clash at Senate Game Hearing (April 3, 2006)
Regulating Youth Access to Violent video Games: Three Responses to First Amendment Concerns (March 29, 2006)
Senate Panel OKs Video Game Study (March 8, 2006)
U.S. Family Entertainment Act Introduced in Congress (December 16, 2005)
IEMA & ESA Respond to Clinton & Lieberman Family Entertainment Protection Act (November 30, 2005)
Senators Clinton & Lieberman Introduce Federal Game Regulation (November 29, 2005)
CAMRA Bill Introduced in House of Representatives (October 25, 2005)
Juvenile Violent Crime Decreases in last 10 Years (October 11, 2005)

Digg Del.icio.us 271No CommentsViews+Clash+at+Senate+Game+Hearing2006-04-03+20%3A44%3A12Dale+Dietrich

Regulating Youth Access to Violent Video Games: Three Responses to First Amendment Concerns

March 29, 2006 at 4:18 pm - by Dale Dietrich

Categories: Featured Articles • Policy Analysis • Violent Game Law Cases • Violent Game Laws

(first published October 2, 2003)
Text of Paper
Abstract: Recent efforts to limit the access of children to violent video games have faced legal challenge under the First Amendment. This article presents three theories that may provide defenses to constitutional challenges. The evidence of harmful effects is examined to argue that limitations may meet strict scrutiny. The theory that violence may fit within harmful to minors statutes ordinarily directed at pornography is also presented. Lastly, the argument that video game play is not expression protected by the amendment is explored.”.
Source: by Kevin W. Saunders