Remember when assemblyman Keith L.T. Wright proposed to have kids protected from racist games and its ilk? And before that, representative Joe Baca introduced another bill which wanted those obtrusive warning labels on video game boxes. Take those two bills and up the ante with a whole list of mature content warnings, plus a US$ 1000 fine for violators. Thus, you get this new one. Execute order 66 A2837!

Last week, Gino posted an article about Rep. Joe Baca and his H.R. 231, a bill that would require all games with a Teen rating or stronger to have a warning label on their boxes. This time, the Entertainment Consumers Association (ECA) takes a stand and launches a campaign to trash the bill. Learn more in the full article.

Feels like a bucket of bricks just fell on my forehead. Heard via GamePolitics, a new bill is being passed in Congress which would have some staggering effects on how our video games look all nice and fun-like on the retail shelf. The bill, once approved, will require Teen-rated (or higher) video game boxes to have a warning label on it, much like what they have on cigarette boxes. *facepalm*

Recent documents being passed around Congress and the PotUS office [insert West Wing red tape montage here] gave birth to a new anti-piracy bill which was signed into law as the "Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act of 2008" or, in short, PRO-IP. Back in the ESA offices, Michael Gallagher couldn't be any happier.

Despite their battle cries of "Smaller Government!", neo-conservative legislators are stepping up attempts to regulate the behavior of private citizens while removing all restrictions on corporate behavior. This is almost comic in a way, because, inevitably, these two issues collide.

Take, for example, the recent crusade against "violent" video games. A recent law in Louisiana would have prohibited the sale of such games in the state, but was temporarily blocked by U.S. District Judge James Brady. 

A 21 page amicus brief was filed with Baday by the website GamePolitics, on behalf of developer Ted Price of Insomniac Games. Price, who has worked extensively with the Academy of Interactive Arts and Sciences, argues that games are "a means of expression," no less than literature, film and other arts, and therefore is protected speech under the First Amendment of the Constitution. In the brief, Price criticizes the use of the word "violence" in the Louisiana statute. He writes, " ...'violence' is an incredibly broad term... Does the 'violence' referenced in the Act include... a boxing game, a football game, a World War II game, a game featuring contact between cartoon characters... game creators (are) given the impossible task of guessing the intent of the Act's creators."

His fear is that many - if not most - games could be criminalized under this law's "definition" of "violence" - even his own topselling Ratchet and Crank, in which the "violence" takes the form cartoon-style slapstick. "The main characters in Ratchet & Clank are not human and resemble cartoon characters. The characters 'kill' each other, are 'killed' by the main character and occasional 'dismembered' in comedic ways... a retailer fearing possible fines, imprisonment and/or hard labor... may refuse to sell this game to minors."

Given the current political climate of unrestrained, no-holds-barred capitalism, it might also be appropriate to point out that Insomniac Games is indeed a Corporation, with not only the right, but the responsibility to make profits. The Louisiana law would clearly interfere with the Corporation's ability to do so - and it should be pointed out that, under the terms of the PATRIOT Act, interference with commerce is considered an act of terrorism...

At this point, I cannot help but remember a quote by the great philosopher cowboy humorist Will Rogers: "Congress! Every time they make a joke, it's a law...and every time they make a law, it's a joke."