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

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.
Andrew EisenSleaker - Who the heck are you reading that is claiming "all gamers are bad," we "need to pass laws or judgement on all gamers," that if "you self-identify as a Gamer, you're immediately the problem," or that gamers are "obligated to stop harassment"?09/20/2014 - 9:44pm
erthwjimhe swatted more than just krebs, I think he swatted 30 people http://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/05/teen-arrested-for-30-swattings-bomb-threats/09/20/2014 - 9:31pm
Craig R.Btw, the guy who swatted security expert Brian Krebs? He got picked up recently. It can be done.09/20/2014 - 8:55pm
Craig R.Such things are not done in a vacuum... hence why the 4chan and other logs show what fools you've all been, tricked into doing the trolls' work09/20/2014 - 8:49pm
Sleaker@Technogeek - How do you call someone out that anonymously calls in a SWAT team, or sends threats to people?09/20/2014 - 7:04pm
Technogeek"It also doesn't mean you're obligated to stop harassment from all gamers that are doing so." I'd say you're certainly obligated to call them out when you see it happening.09/20/2014 - 5:17pm
SleakerNow if you disagree with anything in my last 2 posts then we obviously have a difference in world view, and wont come to any sort of agreement. I'm fine with that, maybe some people aren't?09/20/2014 - 5:09pm
SleakerIt also doesn't mean that just because a news outlet says that Gamers are the problem and you self-identify as a Gamer, you're immediately the problem. It also doesn't mean you're obligated to stop harassment from all gamers that are doing so.09/20/2014 - 4:59pm
SleakerJust to re-iterate: People getting harassed is wrong. Just because someone is harassed by so called 'gamers' doesn't mean that all gamers are bad. nor does it mean that you need to pass laws or judgement on all gamers.09/20/2014 - 4:56pm
SleakerAnd furthermore just because someone doesn't 'crusade against the evil' that doesn't make them the problem. You can have discussion with those around you. There's a thing called sphere of influence.09/20/2014 - 4:54pm
Sleaker@Conster - one person getting harassed is a 'problem' only so far as the harassee's are doing it. Just because a select few people choose to act like this doesn't make it widespread. Nor does it immediately make everyone responsible to put an end to it.09/20/2014 - 4:54pm
james_fudgeno worries09/20/2014 - 4:15pm
TechnogeekI misread james' comment as "we can't have a debate without threatening" there at first. Actually wound up posting a shout about death threats and "kill yourself" not technically being the same thing before I realized.09/20/2014 - 3:59pm
james_fudgeDon't hit me *cowers behind Andrew*09/20/2014 - 3:20pm
ConsterYou take that back right now, james, or else. *shakes fist menacingly*09/20/2014 - 3:00pm
james_fudgeOur community is awesome. We can have a debate without threatening to kill each other.09/20/2014 - 2:50pm
Andrew EisenNo one's crossed a line but I just want to remind you all to keep discussions civil.09/20/2014 - 1:54pm
Craig R.tldr: I'm a gamer, and imo those who support GamerGate should feel free to take a flying leap off a cliff.09/20/2014 - 1:27pm
Craig R.Not only that, I'm pretty sure that if actual studies were done, you'd still deny them, Sleaker. After all, it's not what you'd want to hear to support your rose-colored view of GamerGate.09/20/2014 - 1:18pm
Craig R.There IS an issue. Nor do we need a study to show that if you deny it then you're part of the problem.09/20/2014 - 1:17pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician