Paul Smith and Gaming the Courts

August 4, 2011 -

Metro weekly profiles Paul Smith, one of the leading Supreme Court litigators in the country, and particularly his noteworthy work on Brown v. EMA. But before tackling that landmark case, Smith has (and still does) fought to advance gay equality in the courts. Smith was a key factor in successfully arguing Lawrence v. Texas before the Supreme Court in 2003, which resulted in ending sodomy laws.

Smith began his work on technology issues with a prominent First Amendment case involving the Communications Decency Act or, Reno v. ACLU. The law required "all communications on the Internet, even like email, to be suitable for young children unless … screened away from children." The law "was thrown out by the Supreme Court ultimately unanimously in 1997." Smith has spent most of his career arguing against similar regulations including those applying to video games.

The Reno case, caught the attention of the video game industry, and saw him arguing cases for the video game industry for about 10 years all around the country - including the case decided earlier this year, Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association.

"States and cities have tried to pass laws limiting which games can be sold to minors based on their content," says Smith. "Our position has always been, 'there's a ratings system, and people should be able to make choices about these things themselves.' It's not obscenity, it's protected speech."

"And we had always succeeded in having the laws thrown out under the First Amendment, including in California, which is the case that went to the Supreme Court," he continued. "The alarming moment was when they took the case at the Supreme Court. There was no apparent reason why they should."

"But it led to quite a First Amendment confrontation...which had the attention of not just the video game manufacturers, but the moviemakers and the television producers and all sorts of people who were worried that we were suddenly going to have a new exception to the First Amendment for violence and kids."

"But it didn't turn out that way," Smith added.

Smith's advocacy for free speech and gay rights will continue, but gamers are in his debt for his work on Brown v. EMA.

Metro Weekly is a Washington, DC area publication that covers issues and people important to the gay and lesbian community. It has been in operation since May 1994.


Comments

Re: Paul Smith and Gaming the Courts

He's a legal genius, and now a hero to the video game community.  Hats off to you, Mr. Smith, for protecting free speech.

Re: Paul Smith and Gaming the Courts

But he promotes sodomy and wants kids to have access to violent games!!

I'm making this up but I bet some pundits say so to similar effect...

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Papa MidnightWii U Games finding Solidarity with PC Gamers :(08/19/2014 - 6:09pm
Zenbuy all of the bad DLC before they even showed the main content everyone was waiting for. I paid for it, I wanted it, and I got tossed aside.08/19/2014 - 4:10pm
ZenIanC: Yep, both Call of Duty games did the same thing holding back all DLC and then releasing the day one map 2 YEARS later out of the blue. Why play what they won't support. Warner Bros canceled their DLC after promising it because Wii U owners didn't08/19/2014 - 4:09pm
Andrew EisenShe's the developer of Depression Quest. It's an interesting game (although I wouldn't call it fun) and you can check it out for free at depressionquest.com.08/19/2014 - 2:48pm
Sleakerwhat's all this Zoe quinn stuff all over and should I even bother looking it up?08/19/2014 - 2:37pm
IanCExactly Zen. The third one had random delays to the DLC and they just came out seemingly at random with no warning, and the 4th they didn't even bother.08/19/2014 - 2:31pm
ZenI may have bought both AC games on Wii U, but WHY would anyone be expected to get the game when they came out MONTHS before release that they were skipping DLC and ignoring the game? They poisoned the market on themselves then blamed Nintendo players.08/19/2014 - 1:27pm
Papa MidnightIn review, that's fair, Andrew. I just tend to take Gawker articles with a lot of salt, and skepticism.08/19/2014 - 12:07pm
Matthew WilsonFor one has a English speaking support team for devs. Devs have said any questions they have, were translated in to Japanese. then back in to English. 08/19/2014 - 11:41am
Adam802they need to realize the "wii-fad" era is pretty much over and start rebooting some old great franchises like they are doing with star fox08/19/2014 - 11:39am
Adam802unfortunatly, this seems to represent 3rd party's position on the wiiU in general. Nintendo has always sucessfully relied on 1st party but now since 3rd parties and console "power" are so important this gen, they're in trouble.08/19/2014 - 11:38am
IanCOkay, so what can Nintendo do to these 3rd parties? Huh? If a company release games late with missing content then of course it won't sell. Seems simple to me.08/19/2014 - 11:25am
Andrew EisenSakurai and Co. REALLY need to go back in there and re-pose Samus. She is so incredibly broken.08/19/2014 - 11:06am
ZippyDSMleeUntill Nin starts paying out the azz or doing much much more to help 3rd party games development, the WIIU is dead in the water.....08/19/2014 - 11:03am
ZippyDSMleehttps://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=316135481893472&id=22417313775637408/19/2014 - 11:02am
ZippyDSMlee*gets out the popcorn* this will be fun08/19/2014 - 11:01am
Andrew EisenIt's not as simple as "Nintendo gamers don't buy AC games."08/19/2014 - 11:01am
Andrew EisenACIII was late, missing DLC (so was IV) and was on a brand new platform that had never had the series competing against two platforms that had an install base of 80 million a piece who had all the previous games.08/19/2014 - 11:01am
Andrew EisenI'd say TechDirt is being a bit unfair towards Kotaku's article to the point of slightly mischaracterizing it. It's not really bad but, while a little muddled, neither is the Kotaku article.08/19/2014 - 10:59am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician