Louisiana passes game bill

By Games Industry.biz Published 9 June, 2006

Victory for Thompson.

The Lousiana Senate has passed HB1381, a bill designed to restrict the sale of games with violent content which was co-authored by notorious anti-videogames campaigner Jack Thompson.

HB1381, which Thompson wrote together with Representative Roy Burrell, would make it illegal to sell or rent out a game to a minor if it met three conditions. Namely, if an "average person" would consider that it "appeals to the minor's morbid interest in violence"; if the game "depicts violence in a manner patently offensive to prevailing standards"; and if it "lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value for minors." Anyone violating the law could face a fine of up to USD 2000 and a maximum 12 month prison sentence.

The bill was approved by a key committee last week and has now been unanimously passed by the Louisiana State Senate. It's now up to Governor Kathleen Blanco to sign the bill into law - which seems highly likely.

It's also likely that the Entertainment Software Association will respond with the threat of legal action, as in the case of the bill passed in Minnesota recently.

Meanwhile, New York Senator Hillary Clinton has called for the US Government to support further research into the effects of electronic media on children - including TV and the Internet as well as videogames.

"We don't know the effects," Clinton told the audience at an event organised by the New America Foundation.

"Never have children been raised in such a media-saturated environment. How do we get more research, better facts and evidence?"

Clinton is hoping Congress will approve a bill she has co-authored which, if it became law, would impose fines on anyone selling or renting Mature or Adults Only-rated games to minors.

Earlier this week, her office released a downloadable "media guide" designed to help parents understand the ratings systems used for TV and games, and how to make use of the parental control option featured in many electronic entertainment devices. "Obviously parents are on the front line, but a lot of them need help," Clinton commented.

Picture of Games.

About Games Industry.biz

Read more articles from Games by visiting the Games Industry.biz archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (50) Latest comment 6 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Steroyd #1 6 years ago

    a law to stop minors buying videogames.

    shut... up!! O_O

  • Mildew #2 6 years ago

    Can't we exile Thompson to the moon?

  • morriss #3 6 years ago

    Dick.

  • Wrestlevania #4 6 years ago

    if an "average person" would consider [...]

    And I'm sure Thompson, Burrell and Clinton have gaggles of "average people" waiting in the wings, ready to present their "average opinions" on how despicable video games are...
    Edited by 1 at 09/06/06 @ 09:50

  • el_pollo_diablo #5 6 years ago

    I don't understand.

    Children shouldn't be playing the likes of Postal and Manhunt, because they're not for children - as they state on the boxes.

    So what's the problem?

  • Tonka #6 6 years ago

    average person

    WTF. Who watches the watchmen and so on and so forth....
    Bla bla
    Hypocrits, idiot, only in the U.S. of A mtfr yeah yeah

  • Harpe #7 6 years ago

    Hypocrits, idiot, only in the U.S.
    Bearing in mind this is already law in the UK and other european countries.
    Edited by 1 at 09/06/06 @ 09:54

  • mrsquare #8 6 years ago

    Surely this is a bit of a non-issue? Its just legally enforcing age ratings on videogames, with the added bonus that minors will be actually allowed to play anything deemed to have 'literary, artistic, scientific or political value'.

    If anything, it'll take responsibility away from violent games themselves, and correctly place it with the people who are selling them to/buying them for minors.

  • Wrestlevania #9 6 years ago

    mrsquare: If anything, it'll take responsibility away from violent games themselves, and correctly place it with the people who are selling them to/buying them for minors.

    I agree that children shouldn't be allowed to rent or purchase any media which has been rated unsuitable. But I don't like the way this law is worded. It basically gives legal backing to Thompson, Burrell and Clinton's Witchfinder General approach to the video game industry.

  • Lagto_Soa #10 6 years ago

    It's the subjectivity of the wording that's the issue. What if a bunch of people like unhinged, evangelical sanity-rapist Jack end up in the 'average person' role of deciding what's suitable for which age group?

  • MoFo #11 6 years ago

    Hilary Clinton wants more evidence on the affect of video games on children. Well how about looking at the hundreds of millions of 20 - 40 year old adults who have grown up to become perfectly normal people holding down normal jobs and families and not running about with chainsaws trying to kill one another.

    Maybe the research that is really lacking is a study in to the affects of not playing video games, as it seems to turn these video game deprived citizens in to nazi-esque dictators intent on depriving people of their fundamental right to choose how they wish to entertain themselves.

  • DDevil #12 6 years ago

    Wow, that law sounds very, very, vague and up to individual interperetation. That's exactly the opposite of what a law should be.

  • Teeth #13 6 years ago

    Why not just have what we have, no violent games for kids, never mind the artistry.

    I agree with Mrs. C there though, more research can't hurt.

  • Tonka #14 6 years ago

    with the added bonus that minors will be actually allowed to play anything deemed to have 'literary, artistic, scientific or political value'.

    The way I understand it is the other way around. That Ice Age game could be banned for lack of 'literary, artistic, scientific or political value'. And what about a game like R* Table Tennis? As long as ball physics and well crafted gameplay doesn't count as scientific and artistic values respectivly it could be banned.

    Maybe I'm just paranoid.

  • #15 6 years ago

    "lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value for minors"

    Well bang go about 90% of games out there then. I thought that was the point of games?

    This law, or at least the quoted parts, does seem incredibly vague to me, and down to huge interpretation. Probably something Thopmson relishes.

    It's only Louisiana though so meh, it's not that big yet.

  • Tonka #16 6 years ago

    Louisiana is great though. Awsom gumbo and great BBQ shaks. Oh to see the sun set over the bayoo one more time...

    crayfish.... aaarrhgghghh

  • Mr_Whacker #17 6 years ago

    For me I think its a good thing to legitimise ratings systems and give them authority. It will at least raise the profile of games ratings and more parent will see it.

    Unfortunately they word as to be totally vacuous so that Thompson can have a legitimate avenue to chase any game he doesn't like.

  • boo #18 6 years ago

    Presumably they're going to stop anybody under the age of 18 watching TV too...

  • Troutio #19 6 years ago

    What the hell is "political value"?

    Does it mean that it's OK to brutally murder people as long as they have a towel on their head?

  • Steroyd #20 6 years ago

    "lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value for minors"

    wow what a way to set GTA as a benchmark.

  • The_Aardvark #21 6 years ago

    As I understand it needs to meet ALL of the three standards to be banned.

    So even if a) the moron on the steet thinks it's offensive and b) it appeals to sick teenagers it will not be banned if it c) educates youngsters about the distinction between marx's concept of alienation and Durkheim's anomie.

    The artistic merit thing could be a get out clause for some games.

  • Steroyd #22 6 years ago

    yeah and GTA fails all of them what a surprise.

  • cmmart #23 6 years ago

    As an American, I can honestly say that our youth have been corrupted by the likes of Newell, Carmack, Rockstar, and Mario. I glad this bill has passed in a state where there are more pressing concerns i.e. New Orleans. Way to focus on the issues that really matter. I am also pleased that Ms. Clinton has a new agenda to press on the national front. This will definitely appeal to the soccer mom's across the country and the religious zealots - the same morons who elected the man whom I am certain will go down in the tomes of history as America's worst president. Welcome to the United Theocracy of the America. Jack Thompson and his folks make me livid. Sorry for the rant. Best wishes with Rooney's metatarsal. I know for one I want to watch him set the World Cup alight.

  • Nobuo #24 6 years ago

    Are lot of you are misreading the "literary, artistic, scientific or political value" bit. What it says in the article is that a game can be as violent as it wants, as long as it has literary, artistic, scientific or political value it can still be sold to minors.

    Which is a loophole for the violent games to sneak through if you ask me. It doesn't say all games without those values are banned.

    Meh. I personally don't see the problem with restricting violent games to kids... it seems pretty overdue if you ask me. As long as the parents don't have to bother monitoring their kids I'm pretty sure the Americans will be happy.
    Edited by 1 at 09/06/06 @ 11:19

  • step #25 6 years ago

    yeah and GTA fails all of them what a surprise.
    What, you mean just like in the UK, where it's rated 18 and therefore not legally available for sale to a minor?

    Just because a game that "appeals to the minor's morbid interest in violence" *AND* the game "depicts violence in a manner patently offensive to prevailing standards" *AND* it "lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value for minors" (note the ands, not ors) can't be bought by a kid it doesn't mean everyone else can't!

  • Kami #26 6 years ago

    Look, I would happilly support the bill if it simply stated that an age-rating had to be legally enforced. If a game is very violent, gory, has bad language and shocking scenes, slap an 18 or over and make sure that only those 18 years or over can buy it. This whole thing about whether it has artistic merit is bull and a loophole to squeeze through and cause more arguments.

    Seriously, it's this idiocy that allows people like Jack to have such sway in the US. Elsewhere in the world, the guy is mocked and ridiculed because we HAVE these restrictions on the content that minors can see. But in the USA, they cannot, because freedom of media and indeed, freedom of speech is part of the first amendment - and even if it maks perfect sense in todays society to have age restrictions on content, most Americans could not bear the first ammendment being compromised - even if that compromise is just an employing of common sense in the 21st Century.

    So they're in a catch-22 situation. Whilst many would want a proper law stating this age-limit, they don't want it to compromise the first amendment. I think eventually, they are going to end up in a situation where they will have no choice but to choose between the two...

    I hope they make the sensible decision to in the end, just bung proper restrictions on and have done with it. Then people like Jack will have absolutely no case and hopefully, fade away into obscurity.

  • Rambaldi #27 6 years ago

    If there's one thing that makes me lean towards digital distibution, it's evangelical high and mightly fuckwits like these.

  • tenma #28 6 years ago

    Hypocrits, idiot, only in the U.S. of A mtfr yeah yeah

    I think the average American could probably spell 'hypocrite' correctly, at least. :\

  • Tonka #29 6 years ago

    Yeah, but what about sarcasm or irony?

  • tenma #30 6 years ago

    Yeah, but what about sarcasm or irony?

    I think the average American is probably better at those as well, tbh. :\

  • Tonka #31 6 years ago

    Look, this is you in five years.

  • Freek #32 6 years ago

    The problem isn't with prohibiting the sale of mature media to minors. The problem is the way that games are being singled out and restricted with a vaguely formulated law that reeks of "oh noes games are Teh Evil!".
    Instead of a common sense aproach that aplies to all media.

    1up has a verry nice article about the state of politics vs media in the US.
    Edited by 1 at 09/06/06 @ 12:31

  • Mr_Whacker #33 6 years ago

    What an odd situation to find ourselves in. Most people making and playing games are behind age ratings, and want to drive usage. Meanwhile the people whom they would benefit (parents of minors) seem to ignore it and prefer righteous indiganation after the fact to spending 5 seconds to find out what the content is. Ha ha!

  • SimonM7 #34 6 years ago

    "I'm not a minor so I don't care"
    "Kids shouldn't be playing those games anyway, so what's the problem?"

    The problem is; I was 13 years old when I DESPERATELY wanted to play Mortal Kombat 2. Now, you may say "but MK isn't that scary!", but the thing is, it had an 18 sticker on it. Selling MK2 to me would've been illegal.

    I got MK2 when I was 13, and I played it to death. I thought it was absolutely awesome, and I even drew fatalities in Deluxe Paint on my Amiga.

    This isn't about people who are into games making the call if a game deserves this or that rating, this is about some truly mind boggling ratings on games (The Outfit has an 18 rating on it for some unfathomable reason) that prevents young passionate gamers from playing games that wouldn't do them any harm.

  • red_ray #35 6 years ago

    seems sensible enough - stop kids from playing adult games.

    but this law could never work since all 3 conditions have to be met - the 3rd point "lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value for minors"

    A half decent lawyer could show that 99% of games have artistic value to minors.

  • tenma #36 6 years ago

    Look, this is you in five years.

    And even with that mug sadly, I'll still be getting more sex than you. :'(

  • Xerx3s #37 6 years ago

    So, what was the chance to get hit by a metroid again?

    /makes a wish

  • Krun #38 6 years ago

    Quote:
    Obelix from the Asterix Cartoons.


    Taps the side of his head.
    "These Romans are crazy"

  • thelastslice #39 6 years ago

    @Kami

    One thing that is forgotten time and time again is that really, there should be no "flat-out" restrictions of that type in America. All the videogame industry really has to WARN people about the content of there material, THEN, make agreements with the retailer not to sell the games with those warnings to kids under 18 or whatever. I is also the parents responsibilty to not buy the violent games- they don't even have to read articles about the games, just look at the freakin' box! Back when I worked at Toys R Us when I was in school, I was a cashier- I can't tell you how many times some little kid would come through with his or her mommy or daddy with a copy of GTA in his or hands. Everytime, I rang the game up, I said my usual little speech, "this game is rated 'M' for violent content, sexual situations, blah, blah, blah-" and everytime, the parent would give me a nasty look and say something like, "whatever, how much is it?" The problem isn't the first amendment, the problem parents that won't admit that they're doing a crummy job.

  • Markusdragon #40 6 years ago

    Yeah and GTA fails all of them what a surprise.
    Time magazine described Vice City as art, and it's full of political satire.

  • William #41 6 years ago

    "I don't understand.

    Children shouldn't be playing the likes of Postal and Manhunt, because they're not for children - as they state on the boxes.

    So what's the problem?"

    There are two problems:
    1. games are now being subjected to criteria defined in the law whereas books, comics and movies are still allowed to use voluntary rating system adopted by industry.
    2. the risk of law suits will cause big retailers such as WalMart to restrict (further) the content and topics of games they are asked to offer

  • Nikanoru #42 6 years ago

    if it "lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value for minors."

    roflmao

    These people are the cancer of humanity.

  • SnakePlissken #43 6 years ago

    The problem isn't the first amendment. It's one of the best things the U.S. has.
    Look at Germany, they don't have it and it allows for all sorts of censorship where it's illegal to sell certain games at ALL and movies are continually censored, not just on TV. Hell, you can't even buy certain films on DVD in their original versions.
    Sure, Germany is quite exceptional in this case, but really, the first amendment is something that should definitively be preserved.

    Edit: typos...
    Edited by 1 at 10/06/06 @ 12:46

  • lotteryman82 #44 6 years ago

    sure must be preserved
    in us many things are being censored (and not only there of course)anyway to the extend of few people please
    imagine if it weren't for that.

    aside from that i m not sure i can take morality courses from a culture that gives all credit to control and brute force and consuming anything around them people
    that would invent new bombs to throw at you just because you looked them bizzarelly and would start a war for the fun of it.
    neither i would take morality lessons from a culture that based 20+years of movies on abysmal images of war movies one man armies ruthless raw models to lead me to a law that even if it applies in one square inch on this planet deals if some get to see beautifully shaped PIXELS with IMAGINERY characters killed brutally on a IMAGINARY world
    if thats the problem right now well they solved it ...hmph

    +judge was a woman so i m afraid she was the best case Thomson would like
    hitting some maternal emotions and lack of knowledge of what games are + stereotypes like game for geeks and bs like that and you have it louissiana

  • bluetoothion #45 6 years ago

    What can i say lotteryman82 , if that's what you think then the only thing i might say to you is that you're ... mercy.
    After i saw your abysmal opinion i wanna puke!
    Hmph go burn on everest man!

  • bluetoothion #46 6 years ago

    Ah yeah , and you're TIROULILOU (google it)

    Sorry for double posting.

  • Dark Scizor #47 6 years ago

    I want to beat up that ass Thompson in public!!!!!! Oh, and I would call all gamers on the near blocks to come and beat him together!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    He's such an idiot that I wonder how many did he shell out to bribe for his law degreee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! There's no way he has got it clean!

  • bluetoothion #48 6 years ago

    You can find your answers here http://ww w.tiroulilou.uk/kozani_eleos/in...

  • NthSimulachum #49 6 years ago

    Hell, I played doom when I was 8. Didn't do me a jot of harm.

    /strokes rusty kettle

  • Swannzie #50 6 years ago

    So much for the land of the free, someone needs to stop Thompson the new age Nazi.