ECA VP General Counsel Talks Schwarzenegger v. EMA

October 22, 2010

ECA vice president and general counsel Jennifer Mercurio is the subject of this GameSpot Interview explaining just how the Schwarzenegger v. EMA will play out before the Supreme Court on November 2. One interesting fact that Jennifer points out is that the average case argued before the Supreme Court takes about an hour. That is a surprising fact, given that some of the most important issues in this country come before the court like the death penalty, First Amendment rights, gay marriage, civil rights, abortion, etc.

While some might argue that Schwarzenegger v. EMA isn't as important as those issues, I would say that having the ability to speak freely in this country - especially through artistic endeavors such as literature, films, music and video games - is the most important issue of our day. Without free speech, we are not truly a free nation.

Below is an excerpt from the interview:

GS: If they declare the law constitutional, what does that mean? Does it set a precedent for any state to make laws restricting game sales?

JM: If they declare the law constitutional, then the law stands and is enforceable in the state of California. It would set a precedent for the other 49 states to create similar laws and could push all 50 states to pass even more restrictive laws regarding video games and other violent content. In fact, it could set a completely new and sweeping precedent in the regulation of speech that was once presumed protected under the First Amendment.

Read the rest at GameSpot.

[GamePolitics is an ECA publication.]

Posted in

Comments

Re: ECA VP General Counsel Talks Schwarzenegger v. EMA

If they declare the law constitutional, then the law stands and is enforceable in the state of California. It would set a precedent for the other 49 states to create similar laws and could push all 50 states to pass even more restrictive laws regarding video games and other violent content.

This is the most terrifying piece text I have ever read. The worst scennario would be the rest of the world following this path and is game over for adult videogame content.

I really hope that the SCOTUS won´t fall on the California´s bullshit hole that is this "law".

------------------------------------------------------------ My DeviantArt Page (aka DeviantCensorship): http://www.darkknightstrikes.deviantart.com

Re: ECA VP General Counsel Talks Schwarzenegger v. EMA

Terrifying is a good word. The said thing is, despite it being appalling to people with common sense...these buffons, sycophants, and 'moral crusaders' will give thunderous applause. Tyranny of the majority by a minority. Some may accuse me of being melodramatic, but it is already happening.

I agree with you Mr Garcia. Hopefully SCOTUS is smart enough to see what this entails and sets the record straight with a single word to California: NO

====

James Fletcher, member of ECA Canada

==============

James Fletcher, member of ECA Canada

Re: ECA VP General Counsel Talks Schwarzenegger v. EMA

I have been warning people about this for a long time since this case popped up and everyone called me a crazy lunitic and a sensationalist nut.

Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
tallimarhttp://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-57440902-94/microsoft-legal-win-over-google-may-signal-ceasefire/05/24/2012 - 10:17pm
ZippyDSMleeTIme or an operation!05/24/2012 - 6:43pm
ZippyDSMleePC parts are in wish me luck or hell!!05/24/2012 - 6:43pm
MaskedPixelante38 Studios and Big Huge Games are pretty much dead now. http://www.joystiq.com/2012/05/24/38-studios-and-big-huge-games-lay-off-entire-staffs05/24/2012 - 4:39pm
DorthLousActually, nop, I did miss the emoticon for some reason (getting used to pics?) and I didn't know you changed it since (since I posted previous to my shout and it was still there.) Anyhow, thanks for taking it out!05/23/2012 - 6:01pm
james_fudgeWell we were just testing it. but it is still on the submission to fight $pam.05/23/2012 - 5:48pm
E. Zachary KnightJames, No I don't have it. I was just wondering who does and why. More curiosity than anything.05/23/2012 - 5:38pm
james_fudgeDid you not see the emoticon and did you not see that it has already been changed back?05/23/2012 - 5:10pm
james_fudgeLOL05/23/2012 - 5:07pm
DorthLousWhy? Not shocked that people are barking to an additional hoop to jump through when posting from their already logged in account or just mentionning this to try to paint me as one always complaining?05/23/2012 - 4:45pm
james_fudgebig shock there ;)05/23/2012 - 4:30pm
DorthLousI'll add my voice to those wanting it gone :S I'm already logged in, I don't need a captch'a. That's for those registering.05/23/2012 - 3:54pm
james_fudgeEt tu EZK?!?05/23/2012 - 3:51pm
Craig R.I'm a One Man Quorum! And it's working for me now, thanks. :)05/23/2012 - 3:48pm
E. Zachary KnightHow do we determine who get's the game/captcha thingy? Is there a certain posting threshhold users have to meet before it is turned off?05/23/2012 - 2:25pm
james_fudgeGive it a chance, we're still adjusting it ;)05/23/2012 - 11:20am
james_fudgeOne does not a Quorum make Craig.05/23/2012 - 11:16am
Craig R.If I complete the stupid game, and it just deletes my comment, what's the point?05/23/2012 - 11:15am
Craig R.Ok, the little captcha game? You can get rid of it already.05/23/2012 - 11:13am
Craig R.FCC boss is giving the thumbs up to usage-based pricing for Internet access05/23/2012 - 11:08am

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician