RSSNew York Governor approves tightened video game regulations
By Tim Conneally | Published July 23, 2008, 12:30 PM
New York Governor David Patterson yesterday approved a bill that will make ESRB video game ratings mandatory, require parental controls in consoles, and fund a study of the correlation between in-game and real-life acts of violence.
The state senate voted 61-1 in favor of the bill (A.11717 / S.6401-A) under the sponsorship of state senator Andrew Lanza (R).
Display of a game's rating is currently voluntary, and Lanza's criticism of that system follows some recursive logic: "The problem with 'voluntary' is that tomorrow someone can change their mind. Someone could decide tomorrow to no longer place ratings on these games. Ratings are voluntary in the US." It appears Lanza's problem with "voluntary" is that it is not "mandatory."
The single assembly member who voted against the bill was Carl E. Heastie of the 83rd district, one of the youngest New York State legislators.
In addition to the mandatory ratings display on games sold in NY stores, the law calls for every new video game sold at retail to include "a mechanism, device, or control system that allows an owner, through the use of a personal identification number, password or similar technology, to prevent the display on such video game console of video games, or portions thereof, containing certain content or having certain ratings."
Civil penalties for violating this section of the law would range from $500 to $50,000.
Section 554 of the law calls for the creation of a sixteen-member advisory council on interactive media and youth violence, to be appointed by the governor. It would "Address the potential impact of interactive media and similar entertainment devices on minors, with particular attention focused on any relationship between the use of such devices and violent tendencies."
New York's Civil Liberties Union has voiced its concern of the constitutionality of the law, and groups of New York gamers have called it a potentially huge waste of taxpayer dollars.
In other states, similar laws were put forth and subsequently shot down as violations of the rights of video game manufacturers. Illinois, Michigan, Louisiana, andCalifornia all overturned similar laws for violating the first amendment. The Entertainment Software Association championed many of these appeals.
But legislators aren't giving up. California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger appealed a court ruling that struck down a law preventing the sale or rental of "ultra-violent" video games to anyone under 18, and would have required clear labeling of such games. In May, bipartisan bill was introduced in the US House of Representatives aimed at forcing stores to card minors attempting to purchase video games rated "Adults Only" or "Mature."
Earlier in 2008, a similar law in Minnesota was blocked by a federal appeals court, stopping a law that would have fined minors $25 if they were caught attempting to purchase or rent video games with the "M" or "AO" rating.
Former presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Clinton (D - N.Y.) and Sen. Joe Lieberman (I - Conn.) have supported legislation both on the state and federal level, and worked with the ESRB for a nationwide television campaign to inform parents about violent video games in 2006.
In real life i haven't...
casted a frost bolt at anyone.
thrown a plasma granade.
or stolen a car while shooting at the cops.
I have stepped on an ant and it died
What degree of violence are they planning to measure, and does this include the lack of responsebility the parents take.
Score: 0
|1) How is this any different than the movie ratings system, which I'd argue is a good thing in informing viewers and parents of a general sense of content. Plenty of X rated material available despite there being ratings for movies in place. Nothing's being hampered by its presence.
2) Why is giving parents trying to be responsible for their kids another tool a bad thing? I'd have to believe that 99% of the parental controls in consoles will never be turned on anyway.
3) Go ahead and study the correlative effects of video games on real-life acts of violence, but don't stop there. Study the effects of movies and all other forms of media and advertising as well. Is a girl starving herself to death, or a boyfriend strangling his girlfriend after watching Natural Born killers any different?
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=774889
Score: 0
|1) It would be good except there is no standard or guide lines to how movies are rated. Some folks just decided based on their opinion what they think of a movie, that's not all that good.
2) It's more of a government control tool then a help for parents. Just my opinion.
3) There have been several exhaustive studies on videos games, tv, movies etc. and their relation to violence. Just more waste of tax payers money for what I think is more a political move to help the politicians then to do anything about violence. The deal with violence you have to deal with the causes which they are not.
Score: 0
|Here's an idea that is sure to fail - all because it would come far too close to holding the actual parties accountable!
How about passing a law that requires parents to be responsible and accountable.
...And to extend the scope of the law to requiring children to be accountable to their parents.
Nah, who am I kidding? That won't even fly as a common sense concept.
I know, let's just pass more laws against war and pestilence and suffering and hunger and disease and stupidity, and....
Oh, and forget silly studies to study " the correlation between in-game and real-life acts of violence."
I have a simple solution to it all, as all of their studies miss the point! The problem is that violence in TV and the movies and games is all Hollywood violence. You know, a guy gets shot, then runs 2 marathons, swims the Atlantic, rescues the damsel, HALOs from a plane and then swims back across the Atlantic and appears winded with a slight limp as he delivers the damsel just as the world is saved.
Kids think there are no consequences from using weapons. Its all Willey Coyote.
The solution? Easy. I don' care how much violence in media. But if you do and you think its germaine to the plot, use pathologically accurate violence. No neat little holes with just a cute trickle or blood when someone is shot in the forehead with a 45ACP.
Nope. Make is ACCURATE. Show the back of the skull blown off and the brains scattered over the room.
And if you want real fun, show a real 12 gauge shotgun wound.
The result. Easy! Aside from having folks puking within the first 5 minutes of the average show on TV or the movies or in a game, you will have no need to regulate violence.
Just show REAL violence - ACCURATELY! If its actually necessary and contributes to the show, use it - and incur the results of having your audience literally puking.
So many have grown up with this fake Utopian Hollywood BS that they represent as accurate that few have any idea what it is really like!
Its time for accuracy in TV.
Of course, if you really want to transform the media, simply institute a strict truth in advertising law where any claim must be objectively and independently verifiable by a reputable source.
An why stop thee. If you want to transform this society, simply eliminate tax and FICA withholding and make people aware of HOW MUCH of their out of sight out of mind tax withholding is by making them actually write a check for it each payday and stand back!
Score: 0
|I was going to argue that being forced to add features to something like this to any console os is horrible.
I just think about all the things we make manufactures add to their products. I guess the only difference is that a video game CANNOT HARM ME, where as a car without a seat-belt can.
Plus I take programming to be an art, but thats just because I am a programmer.
Score: 0
|Plus I take programming to be an art, but thats just because I am a programmer.
That's part of a larger issue. Most folks believe programming is a commodity, like the parts in your PC.
Sure, any programmer can do a Hello World app. The real beauty is in the code. Not what it does, but how it does it.
Score: 0
|Care to post your version of Hello World?
Score: 0
|I'd direct you to my first Google gadget, but I fear you would die of laughter.
Not a bad way to go, but I'd feel bad about it.
Really.
;)
Score: 0
|It doesn't state whether they are barring sale with this bill or not.
Making the ratings mandatory doesn't bother me. If that is as far as the bill goes, I am OK with it and it is distinctly different than the other bills (re:California) in that it does not make selling the games to anyone of any age illegal. (Thus making enforcement of the law a duty of retailers)
Tim...anything in this bill about enforcement of sale?
Score: 0
|Yet another reason why consoles having the ability to have their internal OS be updated is a horrible idea. Because we will get idiots like this Governor that will attempt to invade our privacy.
I have not purchased a game that DID NOT have their idiotic rating system.
This sounds like a way for New York to get extra money through fees. Their requirement is NOT POSSIBLE if it requires games before a internal identification for the rating of the game can be added.
This law will never happen, and if it does pass, then it will stand.
Score: 0
|