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

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

Analysis: Despite Ruling, Threats Remain For The Games Industry

There’s plenty to cheer about today in the video game industry — and for good reason.

The definitive Supreme Court ruling that video games are entitled to First Amendment protections is something developers, publishers and industry backers have been actively trying to secure for years. Achieving the goal is laudable, but it’s not the end of the fight — not by a long shot.

Read more at Gamasutra

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.


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.”


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.


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

E3 2011: Where’s the Supreme Court verdict?

Last November, the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral arguments in a case that could have a massive effect on how the video game industry operates. But nearly seven months later, we’re still waiting for a ruling.

The Court once again did not issue a ruling on Brown v. EMA Monday morning, which mildly surprised some industry observers who had expected it to come down as the industry starts its annual trade show. The next opportunity for a ruling in the case will come Thursday, as E3 kicks off its last day.

Read more at Variety’s Technotainment blog

Supreme Court hears challenge to vidgame ban

Supreme Court justices grilled both sides of the vidgame violence issue Tuesday as the high court heard oral arguments on the challenge to California’s ban on sales of such games to minors. Justices ultimately seemed skeptical of the constitutionality of the law enacted in 2005.

The members of the court seemed concerned about the First Amendment impact of siding with California in the case, Schwarzenegger vs. Entertainment Merchants Assn.

Read more at Daily Variety