Joystiq

ESA receives $282,794 reimbursement from California

Alexander Sliwinski — 2008-08-05T14:30:00+00:00

The ESA, after a series of recent blows, is certainly becoming a more transparent organization -- and adding just a hint of badass to its rep. As a warning to all the other states out there looking to take on the industry with unconstitutional legislation, the ESA has placed an image of California's $282,794 legal fee reimbursement check in its latest press release. That's like the business equivalent of putting your enemy's head on a stick on the front lawn.

The ESA states that "California deserves more" than politicians pursuing "flawed legislation" and lists several places that California would have been better served spending the cash on (listed after the break). Most depressingly for California taxpayers is that this check isn't even the end of the story. The state is currently appealing the judge's injunction on the game law. Meaning, if the courts maintain the same ruling, then the ESA is going to get even more cash from California's piggy bank.

ESA's ideas on where California should focus its efforts:

California is currently facing a $15-billion budget gap^[1]
More than 10,000 California state employees were laid off last week in light of the budget crisis^[1]
Governor Schwarzenegger is seeking to cut wages for nearly 200,000 state employees^[2]
The state already cut 10 percent to its Medicaid reimbursement rate and deferred payments to vendors^[3]

[1] "Schwarzenegger makes layoffs, orders pay cuts for California state workers" - Los Angeles Times, August 1, 2008
[2] "State agencies affected by Schwarzenegger's order" - Associated Press, August 1, 2008
[3] "California Is Among States Struggling With Budgets" - New York Times, August 3, 2008

Permalink | Email this | Comments

New York governor signs 'unnecessary' game law

Alexander Sliwinski — 2008-07-22T15:58:00+00:00

Filed under: Culture, Business

New York Governor David Patterson has signed some of the most ... well, put it this way, if you like the government wasting time, then you're going to love the recently signed New York game bill. GamePolitics reports the legislation establishes an advisory council to conduct a study between games and real-world violence. It also requires -- here's the kicker -- new video game consoles to incorporate parental lockout features by 2010 and retail games to disclose ESRB ratings. News flash: All consoles already have parental lockout features built in and ESRB ratings are prominently displayed on each game's box and disc.

For its part, the Entertainment Software Association believes the law ignores "legal precedent, common sense and the wishes of many New Yorkers in enacting this unnecessary bill." It points out that the mandates required are already voluntarily in place and the bill unfairly singles out the video game industry. The ESA asks if New York would like to convene a government commission on books, theater and film as well. It's still up in the air if the ESA will sue New York, but the lobby group has gotten good at getting game laws overturned in several states and making its money back for doing so in the process.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Minnesota pays ESA $65k in legal fees

Alexander Sliwinski — 2008-06-30T14:29:00+00:00

Filed under: Culture, Politics

The Entertainment Software Association (ESA) announced today that the state of Minnesota has paid $65,000 - that's $6.50 for every lake - in attorney's fees and expenses to the organization over its unconstitutional game law. The ESA claims it has now been awarded moneys totaling almost $2 million for fees and expenses incurred by defending the industry in other jurisdictions.

Bringing out fightin' words, ESA CEO Mike Gallagher said that Minnesota's taxpayers should be "outraged" by having to pay this bill after its elected officials ignored precedent and pursued a political agenda. Gallagher wants politicians to get behind the efforts of the ESRB "rather than continue to pursue unconstitutional legislation."

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

GamePolitics speaks with federal game bill sponsor, ESA deems bill unconstitutional

Alexander Sliwinski — 2008-05-10T16:00:00+00:00

Filed under: Culture, Politics

GamePolitics has an interview with Rep. Lee Terry (R-Neb), one of the congressmen, along with Rep. Jim Matheson (D-Utah), attempting to pass a federal law forcing retailers to check IDs before selling M- and AO-rated games. One of the better moments in the interview is when GP asks Rep. Terry what game he was talking about when he stated there are titles players could score point for virtual rape. Terry responded, "That's a good question. I don't know of any [specific games] offhand... I just used the rape, pillage and plunder line..."

The ESA has publicly come out against the bill, with CEO Mike Gallagher saying that the bill is unconstitutional. He states the ESA shares the representatives' goals of "ensuring children are playing parent-approved computer and video games," but points out that all consoles now have parental settings which can be used to make sure kids play only the games their parents allow.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Mass. legislators considering 'games-as-porn' bill

Alexander Sliwinski — 2008-03-17T13:45:00+00:00

Filed under: Culture, Politics

Tomorrow the Massachusetts legislature will discuss a bill that would make it illegal for minors to buy video games deemed too violent by the state (not through ESRB ratings such as M or AO). No similar law exists for movies, music or books. House Bill 1423 is dubbed a "games-as-porn" bill because the rationale used to prevent minors from buying violent video games is the same used on porn. The original bill was drafted by Boston Mayor Thomas Menino (pictured) with assistance from Jack Thompson and legislative sponsor Rep. Linda Dorcena Forry (D).

GamePolitics points out HB1423 is based on a failed Utah bill and, given the history of other similar bills, it seems odd that Massachusetts would potentially be putting itself (and taxpayer dollars) at risk of repaying the ESA for fighting this bill in court.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Supreme Court's Scalia believes game laws could be constitutional

Alexander Sliwinski — 2008-02-20T11:30:00+00:00

Filed under: Culture

LawsofPlay's Anthony Prestia gained audience with US Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia to ask him what he thought about the game laws we've seen shot down one by one, by two, by three, over the years. Scalia, traditionally one of the most conservative members of the court, believes that constitutional precedent holds that minors may be subjected to prohibitions that adults aren't.

Scalia's remarks imply that if a game law banning the sale of mature-rated games to minors ever made it to the docket he would affirm it -- really, no shock there. He clarifies that this would not put a ban on parents buying M-rated games for their children and that he believes video games (as long as it isn't declared "obscene") are protected by the First Amendment. As stated before, many lower courts clearly don't hold Justice Scalia's beliefs.

[Via GamePolitics]

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments