Hearings on violent video game bill
The California Assembly is holding hearings tomorrow on AB 450, which would ban the sale of extremely violent video games to minors. The San Jose Mercury News published an editorial today (registration required) coming down in favor of the bill. The bill is opposed by video game and film industry trade groups. The bill was introduced by Leland Yee, who has a doctorate in child psychology, and the bill is now before the Committee on Arts, Entertainment, Sports, Tourism and Internet Media, chaired by Ed Chavez and vice-chaired by Audra Strickland.
The bill applies to video games that include killing, maiming, dismembering or sexual assualts where the virtual harm inflicted is especially heinous, cruel or depraved in that it involves torture or serious physical abuse.
Other lawmakers have tried to ban violent video games, but those attempts have failed on First Amendment grounds. Last year, the State of Washington had its statute invalidated and previously city ordinances in St. Louis and Indianapolis were thrown out. In order to survive the “strict scrutiny” of a First Amendment challenge, unless the content involves obscenity, the government must show that the restriction serves a compelling state interest, is narrowly tailored to address that interest, and is not void for vagueness.
In the Washington case, Video Software Dealers Association v. Maleng, Download file, the Court invalidated a statute that prohibited violence against peace officers in video games, mainly on the grounds that there was not sufficient social science evidence to show the harmful effects of video games on children. The court made the following salient comments:
“Given the nationwide, on-going dispute in this area, it is reasonable to ask whether a state may ever impose a ban on the dissemination of video games to children under 18. The answer is ‘probably yes’ if the games contain sexually explicit images, and ‘maybe’ if the games contain violent images, such as torture or bondage, that appeal to the prurient interest of minors.”
The court provided a road map of sorts as to how to potentially survive a First Amendment challenge, and it appears that the draftsmen of AB 450 may have taken some guidance from the court about the following key considerations:
“-- does the regulation cover only the type of depraved or extreme acts of violence that violatea community norms and prompted the legislature to act? -- does the regulation prohibit depictions of extreme violence against all innocent victims, regardless of their viewpoint or status? And --- do the social scientific studies support the legislative findings at issue?”
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference 'Hearings on violent video game bill' from Silicon Valley Media Law Blog.
