Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Videogames

[Fiz_The_Toaster]

That'll do SCOTUS, that'll do.

 

[Naeras]

This is not only a great day for the video game medium, but also for free speech.

 

[Elementlmage]

Like the protected books, plays, and movies that preceded them, video games communicate ideas?and even social messages?through many familiar literary devices (such as characters, dialogue, plot, and music) and through features distinctive to the medium (such as the player?s interaction with the virtual world). That suffices to confer First Amendment protection. Under our Constitution, ?esthetic and moral judgments about art and literature . . . are for the individual to make, not for the Government to decree, even with the mandate or approval of a majority.? United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc., 529 U. S. 803, 818 (2000).

YEEAAAAHHHH!!! Never say Hue Hefner hasn't ever done anything for you!

 

[Vrach]

Woooooooooooohoooooooo!
Awesome, freaking awesome. So can we have it stick this time? We have the "the Supreme Court already ruled on it, you can shut up about it now" argument now, right?

"Reading Dante is unquestionably more cultured and intellectually edifying than playing Mortal Kombat.

*raises eyebrow* Yeah, and playing Mass Effect 2 is unquestionably more cultured and intellectually edifying than watching Jackass: The Movie, but we don't compare the two as they're completely different fucking categories.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

So, does this mean that a 10-year-old can now go out and buy Duke Nukem or any other R rated game?

I highly doubt it will happen unless the person ringing the kid up is totally brain dead and/or doesn't care, if that is the case it would also fall under the responsibility of the parent. I know when I was ten years old, my parents were always around when I made a purchase of any kind. So if a kid does get a game like that, it isn't the fault of the games industry, it is the fault of the game store worker and/or the parent.

Heck, I'm 25 and have a fuzzy beard and when I bought Borderlands: Game of the Year Edition a few days ago, I got carded. Though I don't think it was on the account that I somehow looked like I was under 17. The guy said, "Sorry, it is policy." So I highly doubt that guy is going to sell such games to the youngster.

I understand not all stores are manned by such upstanding workers, but the industry shouldn't be blamed for slip ups like that or harshly regulated because of such things. I don't even get what they were trying to accomplish in the first place, because the majority if not all stores have the policy to not sell such games to minors.

 

[Denizen]

This is a good day for gaming. This should be a call to all big name industry influences to make games truly deserving of this protection such as the ones that were probably used to defend gaming, the titles that are argued as proof that gaming is art, which it has always been but now more than ever is it evident to those who would say nay.

 

[JWAN]

The law itself was written poorly, the case transcript is awesome to read. Some gems like, Whats ok for someon 18years and 1 days to play but not for 17years 364days to play?

It needs to have a structure of some sort. I guess anyone in that 17 364 category will just have to put on their pouty pants and wait a day.

 

[RJ Dalton]

Huzzah! Tis a victory for our side!!!

 

[PrinceofPersia]

Only one thing to do now: http://youtu.be/jSZB0NjRqzc

CELEBRATE! And make some great games.

 

[internetzealot1]

Is anyone else scared shitless that two of nine justices supported the law?

 

[Sizzle Montyjing]

Although we still have a mountain to climb, we at least made it to base camp
This is really good for the industry, and has even restored my faith in your justice system, after hearing all the 'horror' stories about it.

 

[UNHchabo]

My favorite quote from the opinion:

One study, for example, found that children who had just finished playing violent video games were more likely to fill in the blank letter in ?explo_e? with a ?d? (so that it reads ?explode?) than with an ?r? (?explore?). The prevention of this phenomenon, which might have been anticipated with common sense, is not a compelling state interest.

Never before has a smackdown been so eloquent.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

That does not surprise me. I expected this. The Supreme Court is the one institution that you can always rely on when it comes to the Constitution.

 

[itsausernamewhatofit]

Wonder what the vote break down was. I'll have to read about it after work.

7 to 2 i believe
anyway
YEAHHHHH!!!! WE WIN

 

[Elementlmage]

Is anyone else scared shitless that two of nine justices supported the law?

JUSTICE THOMAS ignores the holding of Erznoznik, and denies that persons under 18 have any constitutional right to speak or be spoken to without their parents? consent.

It scares me more that Justice Thomas doesn't think children have a right to free speech! That was pulled STRAIGHT from the Supreme Court Ruling in question!

Oh, and "Erznoznik" is "Erznoznik v. Jackson-ville, 422 U. S. 205, 212?213 (1975)":

"Minors are entitled to a significant measure of First Amendment protection, and only in relatively narrow and well-defined circumstances may government bar public dissemination of protected materials to them.?

You heard it right from the Supreme Courts mouth! Kids, when your parents or teachers try to tell you that you don't have right, quote them this!

 

[Korak the Mad]

Finally.

Hell to the yes! So there IS some common sense in the world!

I would agree to that.

 

[Elementlmage]

In the Inferno, Dante and Virgil watch corrupt politicians struggle to stay submerged beneath a lake of boiling pitch, lest they be skewered by devils above the surface. Canto XXI, pp.187?189 (A. Mandelbaum transl. Bantam Classic ed.1982).

YYYEEEESSSSS! AHAHAHAHAH! Justice Scalia has the same taste in translators I do! I have the same sense of literary taste as a Supreme Court Justice, WOOT!

 

[Neverhoodian]

Kudos that common sense prevailed.

Now if you'll excuse me, I need to play some TF2. Those backs aren't going to stab themselves.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

Is anyone else scared shitless that two of nine justices supported the law?

I kind of expected it. Some of the conservative justices on the court -- particularly the Bush appointees -- seem to think free speech only applies to speech they like. It's one of the many reasons I find the whole "activist judge" malarky hilarious -- notice how you never hear that phrase from a liberal, even though both sides could make a pretty good argument about the other side's justices having an activist streak. (The real problem with it is that Supreme Court justices have been "legislating from the bench" as the old saw goes since Marbury V. Madison, all the way back in 1803, and it's been a basic part of the Supreme Court's powers ever since then. Complaining about it is like complaining about the president's veto power -- completely idiotic.)

OT: Score one for the good guys, but it's not like this was an unexpected ruling. Any school child could have told you what the ruling would have been, assuming they had had a civics class at some point -- which is sadly not a given these days.

P.S.: As a liberal, I have to give kudos to Scalia for having read the constitution and actually applying it correctly. These don't have to be partisan issues, and it's a shame that it they so often work out that way.

 

[DarthFennec]

So awesome! We finally got past this stage, we have a SCOTUS decision, now we won't have to deal with bullshit bills like this anymore. I'm not really surprised because that bill is pretty blatantly unconstitutional, but it still feels wonderful for this whole thing to be finally over