Supreme Court Makes A Mockery Of California's Violent Game Ban

Wednesday, November 3rd, 2010

Devin Coldewey is a Seattle-based writer and photographer. He has written for the TechCrunch network since 2007. Some posts he’d like you to read: The Dangers of Externalizing Knowledge | Generation i | Surveillant Society | Choose Two | Frame Wars | The User’s Manifesto | Our Great Sin His personal website is coldewey.cc. → Learn More


This is fantastic. As you may know, California is attempting to bring about a nationwide ban on selling violent video games to minors. Their case must be phenomenally weak, because the Justices spend quite a bit of time ribbing the Attorney General over how this incredibly vague and biased proposal could potentially be applied to all manner of things.

Justice Sotomayor: “Would a video game that portrayed a Vulcan as opposed to a human being, being maimed and tortured, would that be covered by the act?”

Classic. There’s a whole transcript and a few more excerpts over at Rock, Paper, Shotgun if you’re interested.

Interestingly, I just watched Howl last night, the biopic about Allen Ginsberg and the eponymous poem that was notoriously nearly banned for obscenity. There are definitely some correlations between the two cases — one of the Justices actually suggests (playfully) that there should be a board that oversees whether a game is in fact too violent for kids, and they could call it the California Office of Censorship.

Anyway, it’s not looking good for the proposal, which was of course a silly thing to begin with.

Free Speech Wins! FATALITY

Sponsored Ads

blog comments powered by Disqus

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads

Upcoming Events

SXSW 2012

Austin, Texas

Disrupt NY 2012

New York City

Disrupt SF 2012

San Francisco, CA