Gamerprudence: Video Game Law Explained

See how the pieces fit. Interactive Entertainment Law is a ten billion dollar per year industry and growing. Read thoughtful analysis by Attorney Mike Mintz on the latest issues in "video game law" and related IP practice.

My Photo
Name:
Location: North East, United States

I work in publishing because I love words and information. The process of expressing thought, particularly verbal or written, demonstrates the most divine attributes of humanity. In the early 21st century we have experienced rapid evolution in the dissemination of information. Connecting billions of people in an ironic deluge of information has diluted the market for creativity. We must now rethink what it means to express and contribute content to the swelling marketplace of ideas. May we be guided in our quest to express by two great pieces of writing advice: "Fundamental accuracy of statement is the one true morality of writing." (Ezra Pound) "Omit needless words." (Strunk & White, The Elements of Style)

Monday, June 12, 2006

Video Game Law Review - June 12th

Before we begin let me start by saying it has been a busy summer! I thought that I'd have more time to do these posts now that law school is out for three months, but the day job's been heating up, my internship keeps me going and I've been writing a novel that is scheduled to be published in September. Needless to say, I've missed this place; but enough about me - here's what's happening:

The FTC and Take Two have finally settled the Hot Coffee Mod contraversy. You remember that one, right? If you put in a code to your console Grand Theft Auto San Andreas you could unlock a mini-game that lets you control the main character as he copulates with unwitting females, (it was pretty graphic too). Ultimately, the two entities agreed on an $11,000 fine for any future hot coffee style incidents, plus the publication of software code that allows parents or other concerned parties to block the mini-game.

Louisiana unanamously passed a Video Game Violence bill (HB1381) by a vote of 102 to 0. The bill would "prohibit the sale of games to minors that could be deemed as potentially harmful." It would call for measures that allow a judge to determine whether a video game meets "established criteria" that renders it appropriate for sale to minors. If it fails to do so, then the game could be pulled from store shelves and only sold to those over 18 with ID. The Governor has yet to sign the bill, but if she does, then a guilty party could face fines ranging from $100 to $2000, plus a prison term up to one year. No criteria was explicitly mentioned as to what constitutes "potentially harmful" content and there were murmurs that such a bill might be unconstitutional (as ruled in other federal jurisdictions). The ESA, a group that has had some success fighting such bills on First Amendment grounds said: "We believe that a combination of parental choice and parental control is the only legal, sensible, and most importantly, effective way to help parents keep inappropriate video games from children, and we dedicate ourselves to working with all parties to accomplish this goal."

The governor of Minnesota has signed a bill into law (HF1298 bill), which would levy $25 fines against any minors who purchase M (Mature) or AO (Adult Only) rated video games. Far from criminalizing video games, the bill's promulgator Jeff Johnson, said that the offense would not go on the child's record. The bill takes effect on August 1st 2006.

Valve Corporation v. Sierra Entertainment, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29617, case write up will be posted soon.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home