Utah Might be on Game Industry Side in Schwarzenegger Case

August 19, 2010 -

As each side in the Schwarzenegger v. EMA case attempts to lure state attorney generals to sign on to their respective amicus briefs, Common Sense Media Chief James Steyer is turning up the pressure on one particular person.

The LA Times features an excerpt from a letter by Steyer to Utah Attorney General, and a one-time target of a certain disbarred attorney, Mark Shurtleff (pictured). While Shurtleff might seem like a natural to sign on to a brief in favor of the California law—he argued for a ban of the game 25 to Life in 2005—he has also demonstrated considerable backbone, once challenging a proposed Utah law introduced by a now disbarred attorney as unconstitutional.

Shurtleff also appears to be leaning toward signing on to the videogame industry side in the Schwarzenegger v. EMA fight, as evidenced by Steyer’s strong words:

We've been told that you and the state of Utah are thinking about supporting the video game industry by signing on to an amicus brief opposing the law passed in California. We find this perplexing given that the mission on your Web site states that your office is especially focused 'on protecting children' and your bio on Twitter states 'I am focused on protecting children, families and the citizens of Utah.' It is hard to believe that someone making these statements would support the video game industry's anti-child safety position.

Steyer has previously described the Schwarzenegger v. EMA case in front of the Supreme Court as being “all about sanity, not censorship.”


Comments

Re: Utah Might be on Game Industry Side in Schwarzenegger ...

"The LA Times features an excerpt from a letter by Steyer to Utah Attorney General, and a one-time target of a certain disbarred attorney, Mark Shurtleff (pictured)."

That sentence is awkward and makes it sound like Mark Shurtleff is the one who's the disbarred attorney.  Rather than trying to be cute by referring to Jack Thompson as "a certain disbarred attorney," you should just refer to him as "Jack Thompson."

Re: Utah Might be on Game Industry Side in Schwarzenegger ...

Are they saying that you can't support the game industry and still be pro-family? (Although crazier groups such as the eagle forum and the parent trash cult would probably say yes.)

Re: Utah Might be on Game Industry Side in Schwarzenegger ...

Doubt those Eagle Forum people will stand for this.

Re: Utah Might be on Game Industry Side in Schwarzenegger ...

"...anti-child safety position"

Anti-games folk seem to have little more than lies and logical fallacies.  This particular one is among the most annoying: the statement that being opposed to game censorship means you are against "the children".   

Re: Utah Might be on Game Industry Side in Schwarzenegger ...

Its censorship it limits what game creaters can do with content.This gives all M games and most T games the same restriction as the dreaded AO rating. How can this NOT be censorship?

Re: Utah Might be on Game Industry Side in Schwarzenegger ...

Looks like a couple typos -- should be Common Sense Media, not Commons Sense, and the following is hard to parse:

"While Shurtleff might seem like a natural to sign on to a brief in favor of overturning the California law—he argued for a ban of the game 25 to Life in 2005"

Should that be "might NOT seem like a natural"?  Because wanting to ban 25 to Life doesn't make him seem like a natural for wanting to overturn the California law at all.

Good article, though; Schwarzenegger v. EMA is the most important GP issue of the year and your updates are appreciated.

Re: Utah Might be on Game Industry Side in Schwarzenegger ...

Steyer has previously described the Schwarzenegger v. EMA case in front of the Supreme Court as being “all about sanity, not censorship.”

It is about censorship!

http://www.magicinkgaming.com/

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

How do you usually divide up your Humble Bundle payments?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Matthew Wilsonthe lose of nn would not be good for us, but it will not be good for verizion/comcast/att in the long run ether.04/24/2014 - 2:16pm
Matthew Wilsonsadly yes. it would take another sopa day to achieve it.04/24/2014 - 2:13pm
NeenekoI am also confused. Are you saying NN would only become law if Google/Netflix pushed the issue (against their own interests)?04/24/2014 - 2:10pm
E. Zachary KnightMatthew, you are saying a lot of things but I am still unclear on your point. Are you saying that the loss of Net Neutrality will be good in the long run?04/24/2014 - 2:06pm
Matthew WilsonOfcourse it does I never said it did not.though over time the death of NN will make backbone providers like Google, level3 and others stronger becouse most isps including the big ones can not provid internet without them. they can peer with smaller isps04/24/2014 - 1:54pm
E. Zachary KnightMatthew, and that still plays in Google's favor over their smaller rivals who don't have the muscle to stand up to ISPs.04/24/2014 - 1:45pm
Matthew Wilsongoogle wont pay becouse they control a large part of the backbone that all isps depend on. if verizon blocks their data, google does the same. the effect is Verizon loses access to 40% of the internet, and can not serve some areas at all.04/24/2014 - 1:14pm
Neenekolack of NN is in google and netflix interest. It is another tool for squeezing out smaller companies since they can afford to 'play'04/24/2014 - 12:57pm
Matthew WilsonI have said it before net nutrality will not be made in to law until Google or Netflix is blocked, or they do what they did for sopa and pull their sites down in protest.04/23/2014 - 8:02pm
Andrew EisenGee, I guess putting a former cable industry lobbyist as the Chairman of the FCC wasn't that great of an idea. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/24/technology/fcc-new-net-neutrality-rules.html?_r=204/23/2014 - 7:26pm
Andrew EisenIanC - I assume what he's getting at is the fact that once PS3/360 development ceases, there will be no more "For Everything But Wii U" games.04/23/2014 - 5:49pm
Andrew EisenMatthew - Yes, obviously developers will eventually move on from the PS3 and 360 but the phrase will continue to mean exactly what it means.04/23/2014 - 5:45pm
IanCAnd how does that equal his annoying phrase being meaningless?04/23/2014 - 5:09pm
Matthew Wilson@Andrew Eisen the phrase everything but wiiu will be meaningless afer this year becouse devs will drop 360/ps3 support.04/23/2014 - 4:43pm
Andrew EisenFor Everything But... 360? Huh, not many games can claim that title. Only three others that I know of.04/23/2014 - 3:45pm
MaskedPixelantehttp://www.joystiq.com/2014/04/23/another-world-rated-for-current-consoles-handhelds-in-germany/ Another World fulfills legal obligations of being on every gaming system under the sun.04/23/2014 - 12:34pm
Matthew Wilsonhttp://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/04/steam-gauge-do-strong-reviews-lead-to-stronger-sales-on-steam/?comments=1 Here is another data driven article using sales data from steam to figure out if reviews effect sales. It is stats heavy like the last one.04/23/2014 - 11:33am
Andrew EisenI love RPGs but I didn't much care for Tales of Symphonia. I didn't bother with its sequel.04/23/2014 - 11:21am
InfophileIt had great RPGs because MS wanted to use them to break into Japan. (Which had the side-effect of screwing NA PS3 owners out of Tales of Vesperia. No, I'm not bitter, why do you ask?)04/23/2014 - 10:52am
RedMageI'm still disappointed the 360 never broke into Japan either. It had a bevy of great RPGs in the late 2000s.04/23/2014 - 9:48am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician