The gaming habits of The Supreme Court

The supreme-court-gamingJustices of the Supreme Court may not e-mail each other, but that doesn’t mean they don’t know their way around technology.

In a new story on Talking Points Memo, Justice Elena Kagan says the Court studied up for the famous Brown v. EMA case, which resulted in the gaming industry’s First Amendment protections being made crystal clear, by sitting down and trying out these games everyone was talking about.

It went about as you’d expect.

Read more at Yahoo! Games

Video game industry wants $1.1 million from California

Securing a court victory that clearly defined the First Amendment rights of video games was just the beginning for the Entertainment Software Association. Now it wants California to pay its legal bills.

The video game trade group has filed a motion with the U.S. Supreme Court for reimbursement of attorney’s fees in the case of Brown v. EMA, fees that add up to $1.1 million (and could go even higher).

Read more at Yahoo! Games

Analysis: Why Do Video Games Face Such Resistance?

[Despite Monday’s Supreme Court victory, we still have a long way to go until the general public understands our ratings system and acknowledges their children are safe. Gamasutra editor at large Chris Morris discusses why our jobs now are to help them understand.]

For the past year, I’ve pretty much lived and breathed Brown v. EMA.

I kept a close eye on the case as the Court considered whether to address it. I was in the room in November when oral arguments were presented. And I’ve stayed in touch with attorneys about ramifications in the long wait for a ruling.

With the decision now in, I found myself doing a series of round-robin interviews today on morning radio shows on news/talk stations around the country.

Read more at Gamasutra

Biz relieved over Court’s vidgame ruling

The Supreme Court’s ruling on Monday that violent videogames are a protected form of free speech comes as a relief not just to the gaming industry but to the rest of Hollywood.

The high court, in a 7-2 decision, struck down a California law that attempted to restrict the sale of violent games to minors. The industry had been closely watching the ruling because it feared that if the law were upheld, it would carve out an exemption to the First Amendment that could eventually extend to violence in movies and TV shows.

Read more at Daily Variety

Highlights from the Supreme Court gaming decision

Monday’s ruling that video games are protected under the First Amendment was the culmination of a long fight. And the victory was clearly a solid one for the industry.

But in reading through the 90-plus page decision and dissenting opinions, there are some interesting arguments – both for the industry’s rights and those of parents. Much like the oral arguments of last November, Justices were split on the possible differences in interactive and passive forms of entertainment and the First Amendment issues at hand.

Read more at Variety’s Technotainment blog

Despite Ruling, Video Game Fight Is Far From Over

As the video game industry celebrates Monday’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling, which formally recognized video games as entitled to First Amendment protection, many are assuming the political fight that has loomed over the industry for years is finally over.

That’s wrong. In fact, it’s simply the start of Act 2.

Read more at CNBC.com

Supreme Court: First Amendment covers video games

In a landmark ruling, the U. S. Supreme Court Monday declared video games are protected forms of free speech, striking down a controversial California law that that attempted to restrict the sale of some titles to minors.

The state argued that violent games are harmful to children and, as such, their sale should be restricted. California took a slightly different approach than other states who have attempted to pass similiar laws, though, by including violent games in the same category as cigarettes and adult magazines. The Court strongly rejected the argument.

Read more at Yahoo! Games

High court strikes down Calif. vidgame law

Violent video games are protected forms of free speech, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled today.

In a 7-2 ruling, the Court struck down a controversial California law that attempted to restrict the sale of violent games to minors.

“Video games qualify for First Amendment protection,” the Court said in its ruling, written by Justice Scalia. “Like protected books, plays, and movies, they communicate ideas through familiar literary devices and features distinctive to the medium. And ‘the basic principles of freedom of speech . . . do not vary’ with a new and different communication medium.”

Read more at Variety.com

Violent Video Games Can Be Sold to Minors: Supreme Court

The U.S. Supreme Court has struck down California’s attempt to restrict the sale of violent video games to children, saying the state’s controversial 2005 law was a violation of free speech.

In a 7-2 ruling, the court said that despite California’s argument that strict scrutiny laws (which govern the distribution of adult entertainment to minors) should apply to this sort of material, the First Amendment protections outweighed those concerns.

Read more at CNBC.com

Analysis: What’s Taking So Long With The Supreme Court Video Game Case?

[In this analysis piece, Gamasutra editor-at-large Chris Morris looks at why the Supreme Court hasn’t come to a decision yet on California’s violent video game bill seven months after its hearing.]

There’s a gong in the offices of the Entertainment Software Association that hasn’t been rung for a long time.

It’s called the Supreme gong – and the rule of the office is that it shall remain silent until the Supreme Court announces its ruling on Brown v. EMA (formerly known as Schwarzenegger v. EMA). Justices heard oral arguments for that case last November, but seven months later, they have yet to hand down a decision. What’s going on?

Read more at Gamasutra