Something that just occured to me about the California Game Law

[Scars Unseen]

I'm probably not the first person to think on this, but I haven't read it anywhere, so forgive me. The law that California is trying to pass would require games to be rated by a governmental organization. Would this be at the developer's expense or the taxpayers'? How long would the process take? Would we have a game sitting in queue for over a year before it could legally be sold (this is the government we are talking about here)?

And most importantly, what about indie games?

The ESRB isn't legally binding, so there is no reason for indie developers to even bother with it. But if this law gets passed, indie developers would technically be breaking the law if they sold the game without a rating. Even worse, without a major publishing pipeline, indie developers have no way of positively verifying the age of buyers at all, thus putting them at great legal risk should they ever get lucky and have a game become popular and, thus, visible.

And don't tell me how you already have these laws in your country and how it hasn't been a problem. Yes, I know. And I'm not arguing with you on that. But America is different. It might not happen right away, but if this law passes through the supreme court, indie games will catch the attention of the Powers That Be eventually. It just takes one idiot parent that can afford a lawyer.

On the other hand, if taxpayers have to foot the bill, it would be a viable method of government trolling to have everyone who can program submit several variations on Pong to be rated and thus create a physical DDOS attack.

 

[zfactor]

I'm probably not the first person to think on this, but I haven't read it anywhere, so forgive me. The law that California is trying to pass would require games to be rated by a governmental organization. Would this be at the developer's expense or the taxpayers'? How long would the process take? Would we have a game sitting in queue for over a year before it could legally be sold (this is the government we are talking about here)?

And most importantly, what about indie games?

The ESRB isn't legally binding, so there is no reason for indie developers to even bother with it. But if this law gets passed, indie developers would technically be breaking the law if they sold the game without a rating. Even worse, without a major publishing pipeline, indie developers have no way of positively verifying the age of buyers at all, thus putting them at great legal risk should they ever get lucky and have a game become popular and, thus, visible.

And don't tell me how you already have these laws in your country and how it hasn't been a problem. Yes, I know. And I'm not arguing with you on that. But America is different. It might not happen right away, but if this law passes through the supreme court, indie games will catch the attention of the Powers That Be eventually. It just takes one idiot parent that can afford a lawyer.

On the other hand, if taxpayers have to foot the bill, it would be a viable method of government trolling to have everyone who can program submit several variations on Pong to be rated and thus create a physical DDOS attack.

They probably will have to create a new agency to rate games that will immediatly bog the industry down in red tape. Which means American releases will be delayed massively.

EDIT: I read the transcript and this came up, one of the judges said they can call it the "Californian Office of Game Censorship" or something along those lines... So they will create a new agency to rate games.

The government can also control the industry with de-facto bans by never rating games they don't like.

If this passes (which it shouldn't) the pong games sounds like a GREAT idea, I'll organize it!

 

[tahrey]

Scars ... I love your "physical DDOS attack" idea... kind of like a protest demonstration but without the risk of it being dispersed or getting yourself arrested.

 

[Macgyvercas]

It won't pass.

Dunno. The fact that the court agreed to hear the case at all is worrisome. After all, it had already been shot down by two lower courts, so you'd think that would be enough for them to decide to blow it off.

The Supreme Court is also fairly conservative in their views...these are the people that decided that corporations qualify as individual persons, and that campaign financial donations can be unlimited from any person (and therefore any corporation). Bit concerning.

But back to the OP's question, I have no idea on how the specifics of it would work. Just that it would cause terrible, terrible damage to the video game industry.

If they are conservative, they'll back the Constitution. Remember they recently overturned a handgun ban in Chicago because it violated the Second Amendment. And this law for games is in violation of the First, so I think we'll win.

It's also entirely possible they want to lull California into a false sense of security before slamming Yee with a big fat STFU.

 

[Tears of Blood]

It's also entirely possible they want to lull California into a false sense of security before slamming Yee with a big fat STFU.

Hahahahah.

If this was GameFAQs, you'd be so sig'd.

 

[freedomweasel]

It won't pass.

Dunno. The fact that the court agreed to hear the case at all is worrisome. After all, it had already been shot down by two lower courts, so you'd think that would be enough for them to decide to blow it off.

The Supreme Court is also fairly conservative in their views...these are the people that decided that corporations qualify as individual persons, and that campaign financial donations can be unlimited from any person (and therefore any corporation). Bit concerning.

But back to the OP's question, I have no idea on how the specifics of it would work. Just that it would cause terrible, terrible damage to the video game industry.

The court could also be taking the chance to put these laws to rest once and for all.
The court is very conservative right now, which includes being conservative on how much the government should be intervening with business. I'm optimistic.

As for the OP, you bring you some really good questions, and like someone else said, I'd assume it would slow down release schedules, and cause problems for indie games.

Although, perhaps there would not need to be a process for games which obviously don't fall under the law, like mario. After hearing that the law only applies to games with human characters, I'm guessing indie games makers could just stop making games with humans in them.

 

[Scars Unseen]

I don't think it will pass either, especially seeing how some of the Justices were actually poking fun at the law (never thought I'd get a lol out of a Supreme Court transcript, much less several in a row). But my mind just boggles at the thought of everything from Halo to flOw having to go through a government committee before it can be sold. That's not even looking at the bigger picture.

But if it does pass, I am going to make and submit as many quick development time games as I can. In fact, I'll just do it the Madden way. Change the stats, throw on a splash of paint and call it a sequel. Several hundred times over.

 

[freedomweasel]

I don't think it will pass either, especially seeing how some of the Justices were actually poking fun at the law (never thought I'd get a lol out of a Supreme Court transcript, much less several in a row). But my mind just boggles at the thought of everything from Halo to flOw having to go through a government committee before it can be sold. That's not even looking at the bigger picture.

But if it does pass, I am going to make and submit as many quick development time games as I can. In fact, I'll just do it the Madden way. Change the stats, throw on a splash of paint and call it a sequel. Several hundred times over.

I could actually see that happening on a large scale. Lots and lots of people submitting little short games for review.

 

[Macgyvercas]

It's also entirely possible they want to lull California into a false sense of security before slamming Yee with a big fat STFU.

Hahahahah.

If this was GameFAQs, you'd be so sig'd.

I'm not familiar with that term. Could you elaborate please?

 

[Tears of Blood]

I'm not familiar with that term. Could you elaborate please?

Sig'd is when you quote someone in your signature.

Also, apparently I've Gone Gonzo finally.

 

[Marowit]

It won't pass.

Dunno. The fact that the court agreed to hear the case at all is worrisome. After all, it had already been shot down by two lower courts, so you'd think that would be enough for them to decide to blow it off.

The Supreme Court is also fairly conservative in their views...these are the people that decided that corporations qualify as individual persons, and that campaign financial donations can be unlimited from any person (and therefore any corporation).
*snip*

Well, the court can hear a case to put it to rest, so it doesn't keep coming up - Roe v. Wade for example.

Also, the court is very conservative that did give Corps. the same rights as human beings in terms of free-speech. However, that should be heartening - if they are that touchy about Free Speech I would assume that extends to all mediums. In their opening remarks several of the justices were concerned about the censorship possibilities (ie how would they determine what makes something too violent, presumably a state-censorship board and several of the justices got upset about that).


My guess is that they strike the law down, because of how allergic several of the justices are to impingement on free speech. It's definitely an interesting case.

 

[dancinginfernal]

I'm not familiar with that term. Could you elaborate please?

Sig'd is when you quote someone in your signature.

Also, apparently I've Gone Gonzo finally.

Conglaturations!

OT: I really hope it isn't going to pass.

 

[Terminate421]

I really hope the court see's our side, based on what ive heard, its looking good for us.

 

[Altorin]

The government can also control the industry with de-facto bans by never rating games they don't like.

bingo. Think Australia, but at the center of modern game development.

 

[zfactor]

I read pieces of the transcript on Game Informer's site. It's looking good for us.

I'm reading that, and yes, it does indeed

On a completely unrelated note, does anyone think that this could become some awesome Pheonix Wright spin-off? I'd love to see that!

That would be awesome, but the judges get to interrupt the lawyers, so it would have to be Pheonix Wright: Supreme Court Juctice Edition. (Which is a bit long of a title...)