Comments on: California Video Game Law Smacked Down, Again

By: Today's Top Products

Today's Top Products — Wed, 29 Sep 2010 10:57:52 +0000

Hey, this is a really great article…. Good work.

By: Nick

Nick — Mon, 27 Sep 2010 00:18:25 +0000

Isn't there bigger fish to fry in California? There are countless actors and actresses who are getting away with murder (literally in some cases) but yet they worry about video games setting a bad example? I think California's judicial system does a good enough job at that.

By: Supreme Court to Rule on Violent Game Law, Finally

Supreme Court to Rule on Violent Game Law, Finally — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 01:27:58 +0000

[...] fine stores $1,000 each time they fail to comply. At issue is a California law, passed in 2005 but struck down by lower courts, that defines violent games as works that depict “killing, maiming, dismembering or sexually [...]

By: Jared Newman

Jared Newman — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 21:29:29 +0000

Bill,

NC-17 is a voluntary rating system imposed by the MPAA. The issue here is whether the government should be stepping in, which I don’t think they should.

Also, people do criticize NC-17, as it renders a movie dead in the water because most stores won’t carry it and many newspapers won’t advertise it. The same thing happens with AO-rated video games, which in my opinion are more on par with NC-17, while M for Mature is more the equivalent to R.

By: Bill McMinn

Bill McMinn — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 17:42:26 +0000

Minors are banned from seeing movies rated NC-17 and nobody has said anything about any first amendment implications. I don’t see any problem with age restrictions on Mature rated games. This is just the ACLU trying to justify their existance.