January 9, 2007 -
If you thought the video game industry's uninterrupted string of federal court victories might discourage states from proposing further legislation, think again.GamePolitics has confirmed that the Massachusetts legislature will soon take up consideration of a video game bill of the "harmful to minors" variety. This is the same legal concept traditionally used to block distribution of pornography to minors.
The proposed legislation, which does not yet have a primary sponsor, would block underage buyers from purchasing any game which:
- depicts violence in a manner patently offensive to prevailing standards in the adult community, so as to appeal predominantly to the morbid interest in violence of minors
- is patently contrary to prevailing standards of adults in the county where the offense was committed as to suitable material for such minors
- and lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value for minors.
According to spokesperson Lynne Lyman of Boston's Office of Human Services, about a dozen members of the Massachusetts House of Representatives are prepared to sign on to the bill, as are some state senators. The bill enjoys the backing of Boston Mayor Thomas Menino as well as other influential community members.
Lyman told GP the bill is patterned on Utah's, which Massachusetts officials believe has the best chance to succeed. However, the Utah bill, which failed to clear the state legislature in 2006, is very similar to Louisiana's video game law, which was declared unconstitutional by a federal judge. The legislature in Utah is expected to reconsider the video game bill in 2007, albeit with a new sponsor.
Lyman also confirmed that controversial Miami attorney Jack Thompson assisted in drafting the bill. Thompson was the author of the Utah and Louisiana bills.
Of his involvement, Thompson told GP:
The Mayor of Boston asked me to draft a bill, on his behalf, for the Massachusetts legislature. Mayors get to do that in Massachusetts. Secondly, it is very much like Louisiana. The difference is that these people intend to win the court fight, unlike the knuckleheads in Louisiana. That bill was constitutional. They took a dive because of (ESA boss Doug) Lowenstein's threats.
Thompson's "knuckleheads" reference pertains to the ugly feud which developed between the activist attorney and Louisiana officials, particularly Attorney General Charles Foti and Deputy A.G. Burton Guidry. The "threats" comment apparently pertains to remarks made by Doug Lowenstein to the effect that, "Signing this bill into law would no doubt hurt the state's economy, essentially hanging up a 'Stay Out of Louisiana' sign on the state's borders for video game companies."
Speaking of Massachusetts, GP readers may recall the recent controversy there involving the Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority (MBTA) in which a number of local officials and prominent citizens successfully lobbied for a ban on M-rated game advertisements on buses and trains.
GP: We originally broke this story on Monday evening, but we're bumping into Tuesday's coverage due to its impact on the gaming scene.
Comments
My bet is about 20 seconds after the AG refuses to let JT score all the limelight. At which point JT will take his "experts" and go home to sulk again...
This is exactly why the Industry needs to fight back. It's cause of there inaction that he's allowed to keep trying failed efforts over and over in the hope that one of them gets through.
If the industry started taking him to court every time he started spouting lies and defaming them, eventually he'd be the equal to legal poison, no Politican would dare work with him.
I think it's just a matter of time. Notice that not a single one of those states slapped with 1/2 million dollars in legal fees has even *proposed* doing it again (not seriously anyway, there's always dreamers). Eventually JT won't have any ears to bend...
Let's hope the legislators in Massachusetts aren't as stupid as their counterparts in Louisiana.
1) JT drafts bill which equates violence to porn.
2) He brings in his bogus "experts" to claim games are "harmful", or "games are used by the military blah blah blah" nonsense, which even John Stossel proved was a lie on 20/20
3) He claims brain scan studies prove a "harm" is shown
Here's how it ends:
1) Courts have already stated that violence does not equal porn
2) The so called "experts" that JT is referring to have already been shown to be irrelevent. Craig Anderson - whose theories have been debunked in court in virtually all the video game bill cases. ex-Lt Col. Grossman, oh boy, where do I begin with this guy. He claims games are used by the military for desentization - lie. Grossman bases all his nonsense on some guy who wrote a book about military men not being able to fire their weapons on the battlefield - which has already been proven to be nonsense. Grossman has also called Henry Jenkins of MIT a "prostitute" for allegedly receiving money from the video game industry, but Jenkins has stated he hasn't received anything. Ironically, Grossman asks for a $3,500 fee when he presents his views on video games (proof: http://www.semissourian.com/story/1166593.html). Who is the prostitute again?
3) Brain scan studies have never shown a "harm" to anyone. These studies were even used in Illinois and were shot down by other experts in this field, and they were shot down by the court as well. Besides, these studies have never been done on other mediums (books, newspapers, etc) so there is no justification for singling out video games for regulation - which is one of the flaws with all the previous video game bills. If you can't prove video games should be singled out, the MRI studies conducted by narrow-minded "researchers" ain't gonna do it.
4) Bill will be thrown out
5) Jack makes bogus claims like activist/liberal judges, and claims the knuckleheads in the Mass. legislature didn't fight the bill in court, or that his "experts" weren't used properly/at all. Just because you have "experts" doesn't make a bill constitutional.
6) Some knucklehead legislator in another state asks Jack to draft yet another unconstitutional bill, which kinda makes you wonder, if these are truly "lawmakers" why does Jack have to do their job for them? Aren't they the ones that should write the bills, rather than have someone else do it for them?
we know how this go'es
1. buddy buddy
2. the bill is challenged
3. one day passes and jack starts making unreasonable demands
4. the partnership sours on jacks side
5. jack jumps ship with some claim, leaveing those who signed the bill stranded
6. jack gets vexed over the fact that it failed saying his "partners" did'nt bail the water out fast or hard enough
7. he moves on to his next host... erm... partner
8. rinse and repeate
someone should make it so jack sinks with his figurative ship.
Oh, and by the way... Jack Thompson "and lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value for" EVERYONE. ^_^
Isn't that one of the prongs of the miller test involving pornography? It was ment for pornography and not violence. Let's see they had artistic so art can't be deemed obscene, scientific so sex ed stuff wouldn't be banned, and political and literary. . . for good measure? IF they are SERIOUS about doing a Miller test for minors (even though I doubt it would work) then they should add something that could only apply to violence and not to porn . . . HISTORIC values, that way WWII things wouldn't be banned if they accurately depicted the violence there. Also we should never forget the fact that our country started with a violent revolution and didn't just spring out of the ground.
Anyway I have a message Jack thompson's career is not spiralling out of control ready to crash people are taking him seriously, WHY? because he calls himself an expert and it seems no one knows what he has done in the past. Picture a man who fell off a cliff but has some rope attached to him and was able to lasso the rope onto a rock saving himself from death, now the man is slowly climbing the face of the cliff, this is jack thompson and eventually he will climb out of the cliff and make progress with his ultimate goal. We make think his career will self destruct but think about it so far he has said and done some incredibally stupid things and has this slowed him down? No not really. We need to fight him not ignore him because refusing to acknowledge his existence won't help anything. We need to cut the rope he is using to climb the face of the cliff (and give him a nice push) How? by e-mailing those senators and whoever who buy into his garbadge and remind them of Lousiana. Also we need to urge the ESA and whatnot to file legal action (if not bar complaints) against Thompson for every lie and every slander he makes, if nothing else it will be more productive then sitting here insulting him.
(Translation:)
"And I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling kids!"
Thank You.
Seriously though, it's kind of obvious this bill will fail.
That depends though, on how the parents control their kids. And whether the latter is a 15 years old or any age, I would recommend parents to buy Teen rated and Everyone rated games for them and if the parents feel that they should take the risk and felt that they had done enough to teach their kids the difference between fantasy and reality, then the M-rated game will be their choice though.
I had to say, the behavior and attitude of children lies on their parents shoulders. And don't expect the police force to be full-time babysitters for your children and don't expect legislators nor the game industries to do that, it will be a shame thing to do.
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6163854.html (linked again for convenience)
By the way, Thompson’s wording shows that he has little understanding of what the ESA and ESRB are for and can and cannot do.
Andrew Eisen
The Mayor of Boston asked me to draft a bill, on his behalf, for the Massachusetts legislature. Mayors get to do that in Massachusetts.
I mean, there are just so many things ridiculous about that line that I don't know where to begin.
The law is unenforcably vague. It equates games to porn. It violates first amendment rights. It violates equal protection.
How Jacko thinks this would be constitutional is beyond me - he's obviously deluded. That he still has a license to practice law is a tragedy.
Dennis, would you be willing to email me any details as they come along concerning when the bill may be brought up in the city? I wouldn't mind getting this on tape if I can coincide one of my future days off with it.
go for it
I'm FURIOUS about all the BS laws that that RETARD is trying to pass!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! No one makes me madder than an anti-game activist!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm hot!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm super PISSED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The video game industry is INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I can't STAND IT ANYMORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This makes me want to THROW UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Fifteen-year-olds shouldn't be playing M-rated (17+) games, though.
The problem is that kids are getting a hold of these games that, according to the industry (via the ESRB ratings) are not suitable for them. Since so many retailers slip up in the odd Secret Shopper survey, it's being painted as the industry failing to take proper steps to "protect" kids.
If there was a more watertight system to prevent children buying games that they're too young for, then the industry could go on the offensive and start pointing out the parents who buy the games on their child's behalf - which I'm sure counts for the majority of the M-rated games that children end up playing.
But realistically, the games industry needs to step up its education campaign, especially when it comes to the parental controls on the machines. Encourage parents to watch what their children play, and suggest that they take anything away if they don't think it's suitable.
All of that's common sense for a responsible parent, but the industry needs to show itself as being proactive in the whole process, rather than kicking back and saying "it's on the box". That doesn't cut it.
Oh well... keep setting up them pins, Jackie. Just don't be surprised when the ESA gets another strike.
calm down. crying like that isn't going ot help anyone. our best bet is to counter all of Mr. Thompson's lies and conjecture with truths and facts. Demonstrate that we are all civilized individuals and groups with the patience and knowledge to know what we are doing with our past time.
Would it be advisable if people start emailing the mayor and legislators of Massachusetts about the facts and cost of the bills presented to them?
I had the impression that Australia was quite capable of drafting and passing their own suppressive laws.
There are so many worthwhile things this man could be doing, why he wastes his life on this I'll never know. I'm taking a modeling and animation course in college right now and I'm hoping to build amazing worlds for people to explore and have fun in one day. What are you doing with your life Jack?
Seriously. Why does this man insist on wasting our time and money on such frivolous lawsuits? Not that I have any legal knowledge, but can't the ESA sue for this sort of thing at this point? HEY JT! RETIRE ALREADY. YOU LOSE.
And Daniel. They have this wonderful new plan. It's called lay of the caffeine.
You are the target audience for Jack's tauntings because you just react. What none of us want to see is people giving Jack any ammo and frankly these hysterics I am fearful will end up with phone calls or whatever. Take a step back and think a moment. Jack is a joke to us because of the way he conducts himself in a supposedly gentlemanly profession. It is up to us to ensure we don't live up to his low expectations and to speak rationally.
We're going to be 51-0 folks. It's only a matter of time.
We all know it's unconstitutional, time and time again we've seen judges agreeing with us completely.
From reading through, there's no reason whatsoever why this one won't go down the toilet with the others.
Guess Jack wanted to start the year big.
"Those who don't learn from history is doomed to repeat it."
And once again Jack Thompson proves that, like the Notre Dame Fighting Irish, video game legislation is highly overrated.
I seem to recall reading on here that:
1) The Federal judge reviewing the Louisiana "law" found no difference between that and the other legislation that was already found to be unconstitutional;
2) Thompson withheld his alledged "experts" from helping defend the bill, because he wasn't given total control of the defense(I'm using that term rather loosely here, as the bill had no logical defense).
But rebuilding Louisiana after two major hurricanes clipped the boot-shaped state from toe to heel within a month, rebuilding New Orleans, rebuilding the Ninth Ward, rebuilding SW Louisiana, rebuilding the levees, building levees for places that don't have hurricane protection levees(like Terrebonne Parish), rebuilding our increasingly eroding coastline, rebuilding the wetlands, refurbishing the Louisiana Superdome, etc. makes us Louisianians "knuckleheads", according to the Metropolitian Moron of Miami.
Jack's the real knucklehead. And a pork rind that idiot politicians in Massachusetts want when they're stoned and just want garbage.
@Daniel-MOVE NOOB & STFU!!!!!!
And furthermore, since when is Parental Discretion directly enforced? If the game is marked widely as socially unacceptable, concerned parents would isolate it anyway.
But after all, thats the problem with any anti-game bill such as this.
---"No one makes me madder than an anti-game activist!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I’m hot!!!!!!!!!!!!! I’m super PISSED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The video game industry is INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! "---
laughing too hard. That needs to go on a t-shirt.
seriously, Jack thompson is no big deal. Whatever he does eventually gets canned and its only his psuedo celebrity status that keeps him around. Despite his half brained ideas on video game censorship and the occasional non sensical insults, he really seems to be a decent person. He hasn't killed or robbed anybody. He is a better conservative christian than those far-right nutjobs who are spouting "god hates f---" signs, blaming liberals for the everything bad under the sun, postiing pictures of dead fetuses on Myspace, and misplacing George Bush as the voice of God. And he is not a real anti-gamer any more than he is an anti-music person for attempting to shut down 2live Crew/explicit rap lyrics a long time ago.
I don't hate or praise JT. But I think its hilarious his own obsession is matched by so many obsessed gamers.
I for one, do not intend to take this one lying down, now that its actually in a place where I can do something about it.