so...uh..the "supreme court" thing

[Oly J]

I put this in off-topic discussion because I didn't know where it belonged...perhaps I'm hopelessly behind on things, forgive me if I am, but the whole Supreme Court fiasco a while back, I'm sure you know what I'm talking about, as far as I understand it it was about whether or not video games deserve the 1st amendment rights rights of an art form (correct me if I'm wrong) and the verdict was supposed to be reached in June....it is now June...also not too long ago games were declared officially art in the USA, which, if I'm not mistaken, kinda renders the whole question redundant, so...did they throw out the case or...what?...I won't lie...I'm a little anxious...perhaps foolishly...so basically yeah what's happening with that, does anybody know?

 

[Irridium]

I'm curious as well. I thought the date for the decision was June 14th, but I guess I was wrong.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

You mean this? [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Entertainment_Merchants_Association]

We've still got 2 weeks before they really are expected to state their decision.

If I were going to bet on it, I would say a 6-3 decision in favor of us, with my homeboy Antonin Scalia writing the majority opinion.

 

[Stilkon]

You mean this? [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Entertainment_Merchants_Association]

We've still got 2 weeks before they really are expected to state their decision.

If I were going to bet on it, I would say a 6-3 decision in favor of us, with my homeboy Antonin Scalia writing the majority opinion.

Betting, huh? I put $20 down on Sotomayor.

In all seriousness, I hope it passes (as I'm sure all of us on this site do). But didn't the NEA already say that they'd fund games? Wouldn't that require the SC decision saying that games are legally art?

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

You mean this? [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Entertainment_Merchants_Association]

We've still got 2 weeks before they really are expected to state their decision.

If I were going to bet on it, I would say a 6-3 decision in favor of us, with my homeboy Antonin Scalia writing the majority opinion.

Betting, huh? I put $20 down on Sotomayor.

In all seriousness, I hope it passes (as I'm sure all of us on this site do). But didn't the NEA already say that they'd fund games? Wouldn't that require the SC decision saying that games are legally art?

I'll take that bet!

No, they are not. The Constitution is the highest law of the land. Their job is to interpret it. The NEA's statment is notwistanding.

 

[Oly J]

You mean this? [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Entertainment_Merchants_Association]

We've still got 2 weeks before they really are expected to state their decision.

If I were going to bet on it, I would say a 6-3 decision in favor of us, with my homeboy Antonin Scalia writing the majority opinion.

Betting, huh? I put $20 down on Sotomayor.

In all seriousness, I hope it passes (as I'm sure all of us on this site do). But didn't the NEA already say that they'd fund games? Wouldn't that require the SC decision saying that games are legally art?

well I thought them funding it as I said would render the whole issue redundant, if games are now an art form then of course they should get the same rights,

 

[Kaxim]

The SC has way more pull than the NEA. If the SC says no, the NEA will change their stancemaybe, but the influence only goes one way

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

You mean this? [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Entertainment_Merchants_Association]

We've still got 2 weeks before they really are expected to state their decision.

If I were going to bet on it, I would say a 6-3 decision in favor of us, with my homeboy Antonin Scalia writing the majority opinion.

Betting, huh? I put $20 down on Sotomayor.

In all seriousness, I hope it passes (as I'm sure all of us on this site do). But didn't the NEA already say that they'd fund games? Wouldn't that require the SC decision saying that games are legally art?

You mean this? [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Entertainment_Merchants_Association]

We've still got 2 weeks before they really are expected to state their decision.

If I were going to bet on it, I would say a 6-3 decision in favor of us, with my homeboy Antonin Scalia writing the majority opinion.

Betting, huh? I put $20 down on Sotomayor.

In all seriousness, I hope it passes (as I'm sure all of us on this site do). But didn't the NEA already say that they'd fund games? Wouldn't that require the SC decision saying that games are legally art?

well I thought them funding it as I said would render the whole issue redundant, if games are now an art form then of course they should get the same rights,

Actually, individual works can be censored regardless of whether the medium is considered artistic, while entire mediums cannot be without it being unconstitutional.

The Miller test was developed in the 1973 case Miller v. California.[2] It has three parts:

Whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards", would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest,
Whether the work depicts/describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable state law,
Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.[3]

An individual work has to fail on all three counts to be censored under the miller test. Videogames have never been in danger of failing it, at least not the ones that got released in the west -- some of the Japanese Eroge games might fail.

Edit: The test mainly exists to censor porn, which is transmitted through photography and film -- both "artistic" forms of media. Just because the medium as a whole is art doesn't mean a specific example has any artistic merit.

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

You mean this? [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Entertainment_Merchants_Association]

We've still got 2 weeks before they really are expected to state their decision.

If I were going to bet on it, I would say a 6-3 decision in favor of us, with my homeboy Antonin Scalia writing the majority opinion.

Same. If the first day was any indication, the worst that will happen is making the existing rules slightly stricter. I don't think they're gonna put the jack boots down.

And as long as we're making bets, if we lose, I'm changing my avatar to a pony one for 1 to 2 weeks. I might even let my fellow escapists pick it for me for added shame. XD

 

[ckam]

The decision can be reached by the end of June. Also, I don't think the video game community has any big problems with this since it was pretty clear who was better at debating for their cause. You can check out the audio recording and other cases here [http://www.oyez.org/cases/2010-2019/2010/2010_08_1448]

 

[ckam]

-Nevermind-

 

[Lilani]

I put this in off-topic discussion because I didn't know where it belonged...perhaps I'm hopelessly behind on things, forgive me if I am, but the whole Supreme Court fiasco a while back, I'm sure you know what I'm talking about, as far as I understand it it was about whether or not video games deserve the 1st amendment rights rights of an art form (correct me if I'm wrong) and the verdict was supposed to be reached in June....it is now June...also not too long ago games were declared officially art in the USA, which, if I'm not mistaken, kinda renders the whole question redundant, so...did they throw out the case or...what?...I won't lie...I'm a little anxious...perhaps foolishly...so basically yeah what's happening with that, does anybody know?

Nope, not quite. The National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) decided that video games were art, and thus able to receive government funding for certain projects they deem beneficial to society as a whole. However, that is not the same as a Supreme Court ruling. The NEA only has the ability to award government grants, and if the supreme court ruling swings the other way, that can invalidate he NEA's decision. So the real deciding favor here is the supreme court, not the NEA.

 

[Lionsfan]

Once they're actually near a verdict I'm sure the Video Game World will pick back up on the coverage. My understanding is that right now the Court is making a decision, and that the arguments are done.

 

[Stilkon]

The decision can be reached by the end of June. Also, I don't think the video game community has any big problems with this since it was pretty clear who was better at debating for their cause. You can check out the audio recording and other cases here [http://www.oyez.org/cases/2010-2019/2010/2010_08_1448]

Thanks for the link, man. It's pretty cool to hear the Justices argue on our side.