The Technology Liberation Front - Latest Comments in Scalia on video game regulation

Re: Scalia on video game regulation

brandon — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 15:21:40 -0000

anywhoooooo
i love apples arent they amazing
they like so red and suculant
and i am no fag

Re: Scalia on video game regulation

angel — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 15:20:04 -0000

halo three flippen rules

Re: Scalia on video game regulation

laura — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 15:18:59 -0000

i ahve an asian video game that rules

Re: Scalia on video game regulation

thomas — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 15:17:49 -0000

wowzza
life without video games isnt worth livin

Re: Scalia on video game regulation

ralph — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 15:16:11 -0000

hey hey
i believe that gory video games shall be banned from homes across canada

Re: Scalia on video game regulation

mnbnbnbm — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 09:10:45 -0000

Re: Scalia on video game regulation

Kevin Carson — Mon, 25 Feb 2008 00:44:42 -0000

My immediate reaction is that it can't run afoul of the First Amendment because the Fourteenth Amendment doesn't apply the Bill of Rights to the states.

Re: Scalia on video game regulation

Anonymous — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 17:57:30 -0000

So, Scalia finally agrees that video games are an artform that's as legitimate as TV, movies, and books - and that's a problem?

When the definition of a violent horror game is how photorealistic it is, we don't get to whinge when some people think games should have an enforcable "this is not actually suitable for 10 year old kids, you dumbass" rating system.

The issue of obscenity laws affects all media industries - and its pathetically cowardly for an industry as large as the game industry to claim to be a special case that shouldn't have to worry about these issues.

Yes, there are flaws in the entire legal system - but that doesn't mean one (and only one) media form gets to be exempt. We ought to show a bit of concern for all of society, instead of clearly being interested only in what's most convienent for ourselves while ignoring the larger issues.

Re: Scalia on video game regulation

Jonesy — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 22:21:58 -0000

This is why there should have never been an obscenity law in the first place. It is logical that if youre going to say that sexual content is obscene that extreme violent content can be as well. Im actually surprised it took this long for people to start to make the argument, as anti-freedom as it may be.

Were at a precarious position with the supreme court too, with more conservatives being nominated and being one vote shy of a conservative majority. This is why imo even if you agree with republicans on all other issues that right now its more important to have balance on the court. We need a Democrat to fill the seats that are going to be vacated by liberals in the coming president's term.

But back to obscenity, there never should have been a "Miller test" based on content. Free expression should only be restricted by public vs private, between whats legal to be put on a billboard compared to what is for the privacy of your own home/video console.

Re: Scalia on video game regulation

Anonymous — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 07:35:41 -0000

"Every legislature that has so far sought to regulate the sale of video games has proposed that the bans been linked to the sale of games rated a certain way by the game industry’s private rating body, the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB)."

This is not correct. Most of them have been based on independent standards of violence and sexuality, with no regard to the game's ESRB rating.