You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 06, 2016, 06:08:55 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Supreme Court rules that Video games are Art and are protected under the first  (Read 1931 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline WolfyTopic starter

Amendment.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/gaming.gadgets/06/27/supreme.court.video.game.art/

..Time to break out the party hats, people. :D

Interesting note: The Smithsonian museum is apparently adding an Exhibit called "The Art of Video Games" next year. :D

Offline Brandon

Yes! I was kind of worried for a bit because I hadnt heard anything since the opening arguments but Im glad to hear the Supreme court did the right thing

Offline RubySlippers

But will this open up games like Rapelay from being openly sold in the US market?

Anyone parents should monitor their children on this sort of thing its not the role of the government so its a good call.

Offline Inkidu

  • E's Resident Girlomancer, Dedicated Philogynist, The Compartive of a Superlative, SLG's Sammich Life-Giver
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2008
  • Location: In a staring contest with the Void.
  • Gender: Male
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
But will this open up games like Rapelay from being openly sold in the US market?

Anyone parents should monitor their children on this sort of thing its not the role of the government so its a good call.
Possibly... in a sense, not exactly rape, but it will more than likely end up in adult shops or online websites, as it stands now that's kind of like saying they're going to start selling hardcore pornography videos at Wal-Mart. The main video game retailers won't even stock anything with an AO rating, or anything that doesn't get rated by the ESRB (I don't know about the rest of the world, but this is how it's going to go down in the states). The ESRB being the American industry regulating body for video games, and most of those retailers don't sell Mature-rated games to those minus seventeen years of age anyway.

This is more so that gaming can start treating itself like an art form, and less like children's toys.

Offline Anjasa

Possibly... in a sense, not exactly rape, but it will more than likely end up in adult shops or online websites, as it stands now that's kind of like saying they're going to start selling hardcore pornography videos at Wal-Mart. The main video game retailers won't even stock anything with an AO rating, or anything that doesn't get rated by the ESRB (I don't know about the rest of the world, but this is how it's going to go down in the states). The ESRB being the American industry regulating body for video games, and most of those retailers don't sell Mature-rated games to those minus seventeen years of age anyway.

This is more so that gaming can start treating itself like an art form, and less like children's toys.

Yep. You can't hardly get any AO games at all without shopping online and/or at specialty boutiques. Most mainstream businesses still won't carry adult only material. This won't change anything in that regard, I don't believe. Honestly, I don't believe it will really change anything at all. It seems that the 'for the children' crowd wanted existing regulations changed and the courts voted against the change. At least, that was my interpretation of it.

Offline Maxwell Malamute

Oddly enough, the ruling only covers violence in video games...Justice Scalia indicated in vivid terms that sex was still strictly off limits.

Which I find crazy...I can see for pre-teens, but why do we prefer our kids to be exposed to violence, and act as if sex is going to curl their spines?

I was thinking: Janet Jackson's boob pops out, the FCC goes crazy, issues all these new rules, millions in fines, it is as if the unspeakable has happened: kids might have a seen a breast" Those life sustaining things you sucked on as a baby!

I have never fully understood this schism between sex and violence, and why the one is always so much more taboo in our society.

Offline Brandon

Its cultural and you would not get a good answer unless you were to examine the cultural evolution of America since we split off from England, maybe even before that.

Offline Inkidu

  • E's Resident Girlomancer, Dedicated Philogynist, The Compartive of a Superlative, SLG's Sammich Life-Giver
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2008
  • Location: In a staring contest with the Void.
  • Gender: Male
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Oddly enough, the ruling only covers violence in video games...Justice Scalia indicated in vivid terms that sex was still strictly off limits.

Which I find crazy...I can see for pre-teens, but why do we prefer our kids to be exposed to violence, and act as if sex is going to curl their spines?

I was thinking: Janet Jackson's boob pops out, the FCC goes crazy, issues all these new rules, millions in fines, it is as if the unspeakable has happened: kids might have a seen a breast" Those life sustaining things you sucked on as a baby!

I have never fully understood this schism between sex and violence, and why the one is always so much more taboo in our society.
In my opinion I blame it on Victorian England and the effect that had on a lot of Western society. Sex happened, but it should stay private and unacknowledged. I'm kind of for that aspect of it. Keep it private, and in appropriate places (a la Elliquiy). Violence is a little harder to control. People rarely kill people in private.

Offline Braioch

  • Devil. Mad Scientist. King of Debauchery. Brat Prince. Duke of Snark. Warlock of Orgies.
  • Knight
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2009
  • Location: Michigan
  • Gender: Male
  • Imfinewhydoyouask? Canyoutastetime?Ican
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
In my opinion I blame it on Victorian England and the effect that had on a lot of Western society. Sex happened, but it should stay private and unacknowledged. I'm kind of for that aspect of it. Keep it private, and in appropriate places (a la Elliquiy). Violence is a little harder to control. People rarely kill people in private.

Yes, but I think the point is that the blatant 'oh the world's overtly violent already, now watch this guy's head explode,' (admittedly still amusing >.>) seems a lot worse than being exposed to sex. I too have been confused by this, sorry but I'd rather expose my kids (Future) to sex than I would violence.

Err...not I personally in the biblical sense expose them mind you O.O;

Offline Aiden

[sarcasm]
What is this? Parents need to make proper decisions for their spawn and expect to act responsibly? FUCK NO I SAY! Government, regulate me more please, I am not smart enough to tell my child what they can and can't play!
[/sarcasm]

I am glad our tax dollars are off ruling on mundane bull shit as we dig this country deeper into debt.

Offline Braioch

  • Devil. Mad Scientist. King of Debauchery. Brat Prince. Duke of Snark. Warlock of Orgies.
  • Knight
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2009
  • Location: Michigan
  • Gender: Male
  • Imfinewhydoyouask? Canyoutastetime?Ican
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
[sarcasm]
What is this? Parents need to make proper decisions for their spawn and expect to act responsibly? FUCK NO I SAY! Government, regulate me more please, I am not smart enough to tell my child what they can and can't play!
[/sarcasm]

I am glad our tax dollars are off ruling on mundane bull shit as we dig this country deeper into debt.

Do you...are you going to procreate one day?

Offline Aiden

Not unless she forgets to eat her candy one day.

One day yea, not any time soon. I can wait to have a tax break.  XD

Offline Braioch

  • Devil. Mad Scientist. King of Debauchery. Brat Prince. Duke of Snark. Warlock of Orgies.
  • Knight
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2009
  • Location: Michigan
  • Gender: Male
  • Imfinewhydoyouask? Canyoutastetime?Ican
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Not unless she forgets to eat her candy one day.

One day yea, not any time soon. I can wait to have a tax break.  XD

O.O;

And the Heavens will weep their despair upon the world of man....

Offline Brandon

Perhaps the idea of violence ok sex bad comes from the psycological princple of the Uncanny (Fair warning Im probably going to be mixing up terms here as I dont have a bachelors degree in psycology yet). For those that arent familiar with the princple the Uncanny is a kind of psycological realm thats used in horror stories to promote fear or just unsettle the audience. Its a realm where everything is just slightly off, almost the unfamiliar familiar if that makes any sense.

Violence or rather conflict is something in our daily lives, we all have conflicts whether in our own psyche or in reality and conflicts require that we face them to see them resolved. Violence tends to be the most common response to conflict no matter if its a pair of children deciding who gets the last gummy bear or how we respond to true and lasting danger. However conflict lies within one of the three aspects of the self and sometimes between two aspects like "what we believe ourselves to be" and "what we really are" a place that Young called the Shadow I believe

Sex however is something that no one really knows about from birth but as people grow into adults they usually experience it. It becomes familiar (since they likely have done it or even just think about it) but in our culture where we are practicly drowning in sexual thought but smothered in sexual repression. This makes openess about ones sexlife unfamiliar. If all of that is true it falls into the psycological principles of the uncanny one of the three major pinciples used to express horror




Offline Jude

Violence is a terribly hard to hide thing, but if it could be well cloaked and locked away, I'm sure we'd do that too.  Sex on the other hand, well, it's practically begging to be a secret, intimate act.  That's part of where it's power comes from.  The societal taboo just makes it that much more fun.

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
People rarely kill people in private.

Actually, they do that quite often (as opposed to 'in public') - that's why we have forensic detectives.

I'll agree that there are aspects of sex and violence that should be kept from kids, but I also think that it's the responsibility of the parents to make that decision.

Offline Maxwell Malamute

Growing up in the country, I saw sex at a young age,as most boys do, and figured out what was happening. We had horses, and it does not take much to see whats going on when they get horny, rub against things, with their penises extended, and then mount. And chickens, and dogs, and cats. I had it figured out early.

But now that we live so far removed from nature, yes, maybe sex seems foreign. But I always have thought of the great god Pan, and as a loosely believing pagan, with a small p, admired this line of thought.

There's no evidence that seeing nudity and sex harms teens; in Sweden and Scandinavia, you can buy such things as soon as you sprout t a few hairs down there.

I don't support censorship in general, but why the US Supreme Court decided gecided violence is OK, and simple nudity is not OK for teems baffles me. There really is no rational explanation, merely superstition, taboo, the force of outmoded morality.

From the notes of USSC justice Breyer, on the case:

"What sense does it make to forbid selling to a 13-year-old boy a magazine with an image of a nude woman, while protecting a sale to that 13-year-old of an interactive video game in which he actively, but virtually, binds and gags the woman, then tortures and kills her? What kind of First Amendment would permit the government to protect children by restricting sales of that extremely violent video game only when the woman -- bound, gagged, tortured, and killed -- is also topless?"

US Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, notes on a case that allows children to view graphic violence without parental consent, but not nudity, or *gasp*, sex.

Why does Janet Jackson's breast popping out cause a furor, while the raping and violence of games like Grand Theft Auto has been given the go ahead by the Supreme Court to be OK for kids? Why do we attach such stigma to the things that bring us pleasure, as opposed to pain? Good God, a breast is a life sustaining thing, those things we suckled as babies. And somehow, that is worse than violent video games?





« Last Edit: July 02, 2011, 05:25:47 AM by Maxwell Malamute »

Offline Bayushi

Maxwell, the issue that the Supreme Court decided on is whether it is the PARENT'S responsibility, or the GOVERNMENT'S responsibility to restrain children's use of varying forms of electronic games.

As a Libertarian, I agree with the ruling (majority decision) that the Government need not waste any more tax dollars cooking up a shitty law a la Senate Bill 978, as the PARENTS should be acting like responsible PARENTS and not allowing their children to play Grand Theft Auto.

Most retailers (all that I am aware of) will not sell an M-rated game to anyone under age 17. Sounds like the ESRB is already several steps ahead of the nincompoops who were trying to force this law onto California.

Offline Brandon

Actually there were two issues in the case. The first being the case of parental or goverment responsibility. The second and IMO more important one was are video games considered art.

For me and every gamer friend I have the former didnt matter one way or the other. There were already safeguards in place at major retailers that prevented kids from getting a hold of games that werent for their age range. The only way they could get ahold of these games was to have the parents buy it or to steal a credit card and order it online.

The real issue for me and many other gamers was, are video games under the law considered art and thus protected under the first ammendment? I always knew they were and now the supreme court agree's with us.

Offline DudelRok

Actually there were two issues in the case. The first being the case of parental or goverment responsibility. The second and IMO more important one was are video games considered art.

For me and every gamer friend I have the former didnt matter one way or the other. There were already safeguards in place at major retailers that prevented kids from getting a hold of games that werent for their age range. The only way they could get ahold of these games was to have the parents buy it or to steal a credit card and order it online.

The real issue for me and many other gamers was, are video games under the law considered art and thus protected under the first ammendment? I always knew they were and now the supreme court agree's with us.

Well the former issue would be more-so that video games would be treated unlike any other art medium out there... as it wouldn't be self regulated. So the problem then becomes "yes Video games are art but we are going to treat them as a lower form of art and you can suck on it."

I'm pretty anti the fact games=art but if you are gonna go ahead and do that thing, you can't double hand the comment. But I've not kept up on anything so....

Offline Bayushi

I'm pretty anti the fact games=art but if you are gonna go ahead and do that thing, you can't double hand the comment. But I've not kept up on anything so....
I know it was a month ago, but "What?"