Sign on Options
Theme:
To Dark

NY Assembly passes game bill

Proposed legislation to keep games with "depraved violence and indecent images" out of kids' hands clears its first hurdle.

Earlier this month, state senators in New York approved a bill that would make rating labels on games mandatory just four days after it was introduced. Yesterday, a different gaming bill passed the state's Assembly, five days after it was introduced.

That bill, A8696, would make it a class E felony to sell or rent to minors any game that includes "depictions of depraved violence and indecent images." It would also prohibit the sale of home gaming consoles without parental restriction options and establish an advisory council to appraise the work of the Entertainment Software Rating Board.

The Entertainment Merchants Association retailer trade group quickly denounced the bill as ill-conceived and unconstitutional.

"This bill is impermissibly vague," EMA president Bo Andersen said in a statement. "A8696 seeks to apply real-world standards of violence to the fictional and fanciful world of video games, an environment in which they have no meaning. As a result, retailers and clerks will not and cannot know with certainty which video games could send them to jail under A8696. It was depressing to hear members of the Assembly note the constitutional problems with the bill and then state that they were voting for it."

While previous game restriction laws in Illinois, Louisiana, Minnesota, and Michigan have been overturned in court challenges, New York's lawmakers appear unfazed by the prospect of a legal battle over the issue. Both branches of the New York state legislature have passed game restriction laws this month, and last month Governor Eliot Spitzer promised legislation "protecting [children] from violent video games."

237 Comments

  • GaussGoat

    Posted Jun 4, 2007 8:50 am GMT

    Placing retailers under the threat of Jail-Time for selling a game depicting virtual violence seems somewhat crazy. It is a subjective law, which have the potential to be the most harmful.

  • Irve

    Posted Jun 2, 2007 4:23 am GMT

    brianpoetzel

    think your oversimplifying things there , depending on your polictical view point it's not a case of Government getting bigger and having more control it's about social reponsibility. we don't let kids drink booze , smoke or watch certain movies / shows because as adults we think we know what's best for them ... we don't expect the government to step in and take over but we want certain protections so that other people can't give our kids things that we wouldn't choose to give them or want them to experience in a controller environment. From a purely selfish point of view .. the more controlls in place to stop minors buying .. ( not playing ) mature games the less ammo you give small minded people who want to ban games ... Look at hot coffee .. some badly drawn t*ts and sex minigame gameplay freely availiable in the last Larry game and everyone is up in arms ... honestly the rest of the work looks on and thinks the US is crazy of stuff like that ... but if that game was legally only availiable to adults what could you complain about. it's just common sense

  • KSigMTSU

    Posted Jun 1, 2007 1:14 pm GMT

    Just out of sheer curiousity, I wonder if they realize that the law they have written could possibly prevent the sale of all computers in the state of New York, as they are technically capable of being a gaming console? It would be comical if every office computer in the state had to be retrofitted with some sort of device to prevent play of mature games. I wish I could see the actual bill text and see if they put in exactly worded workarounds in order to make the law not apply to PCs. If they did not, then they could have a real mess if they actually tried to enforce, being that they would need to block the internet in various ways, block retail sales, block sale of any pcs, all consoles, pdas, cell phones, and anything else capable of playing a game until they all had vchip type devices. Seems like this bill was hastily written as a way to get a press release by doing something that on the surface sounds like a good thing but once you get into the actual implementation of the idea turns into a big steaming pile.

  • marc_hughes

    Posted Jun 1, 2007 11:46 am GMT

    Why are people thick enough to think that a child of over 6 couldn't tell the difference between fiction and the real world. It is so easy to appear to know what you're talking about when it comes to psychology any sanctomonious moron can claim that something "effects the subconscious in a very real way and little timmy will grow up to smoke and be rude" and a mob will quickly form to harrass media folk. It is the modern day version of witch hunting. Blame a form of media for a killers actions, just like demons or witches would be blamed 200 years ago. If only they could burn the Rockstar execs at the stake.

  • starcutter20000

    Posted Jun 1, 2007 10:28 am GMT

    another day another law passing that "protects" kids from violent video games while all it does is "protects" everybody from buying them.

  • gameman9

    Posted Jun 1, 2007 9:50 am GMT

    I really think they are using games as a scapegoat for other problems. Or they might be scared of video games popularity.

  • Young_Taizy

    Posted Jun 1, 2007 8:36 am GMT

    At the time this bill passes I'm a minor (17 years old) but when the law goes into effect I'll be 18. I think this bill is unfair not for the kids who want to buy GTAIV but for the merchants who sell video games in little mom and pa stores. If they start asking for ID. The younger kids will just go somewhere else to get their M rated games. Meaning a lost of business for them.

  • sieg6529

    Posted Jun 1, 2007 8:14 am GMT

    because nobody should expect parents to monitor their children's entertainment.

  • GonzoGuy

    Posted Jun 1, 2007 7:12 am GMT

    If there's one thing I thought I could count on the conservatives in this state is (besides being racist, classist, and Italian) to shoot down this big waste of money, time, and resources. I thought conservatives were supposed to be... well... conservative.

    Why the hell are they supporting this piece of shoe bill?

  • Autolycus

    Posted Jun 1, 2007 6:59 am GMT

    "promised legislation "protecting [children] from violent video games." LAST I HEARD ITS NOT THE GOVERNMENTS JOB, ITS THE PARENT. YOU SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO HAVE A LICENSE TO HAVE CHILDREN. OTHERWISE THE PARENTS LOOSE A FINGER EVERYTIME.

  • Gen-Gawl

    Posted Jun 1, 2007 6:32 am GMT

    @Irve
    I don't really think that americans get bent out of shape over stuff like this. It's just that we have two basic ways of political thought here. On one hand some people want the government to get bigger and have at least partial control and responsibility in our lives. On the other hand some people want the government to get smaller and let the individual person live as they see fit with a very minimal government interaction for better or worse.

    A bill like this is seen as just another attempt by the government to gain a little more control over our lives. And a lot of people here don't like that.

  • chrisdojo

    Posted Jun 1, 2007 5:30 am GMT

    bills bills and more bills

  • rivertrolls

    Posted Jun 1, 2007 5:18 am GMT

    games are a form of free speech and free speech is protected under the constitution so id bet my shoes that it wont go any further than the age ratings on games.

    but on the other hand its about time something like this came in so when those crazy kids who didnt get enough hugs from their mum and dad go around and shoot people they wont jump at GTA or hitman for killing everyone.

    it will take a game where you eat flowers to get a higher level and some little kid will eat a load of flowers and die to seriously do anything to the games industry.

  • Irve

    Posted Jun 1, 2007 3:03 am GMT

    joshuahaveron ....

    you live in the UK .. you already have this law .. have you not noticed the large oversized 18 logo on games like hitman: blood money .. this makes it illeagal for a shop to sell that game to anyone under 18 ... the americans just get in a twist over sensible things like this .. if the rateings were enforcable then the Tw.i.ts wanting to ban games lose footing .... that's why sales of manhunt rose when the newspapers blamed it for murder ( obviously against the evidence )

  • joshuahaveron

    Posted Jun 1, 2007 2:48 am GMT

    Why do they care its us who play on them and its not as if we think the games are real or anything we see them as a bbit of fun and non reality, we can tell the difference I just hope the government can see that and at least where I live they dont have this law (in the UK, hint,hint)

  • phillangees

    Posted May 31, 2007 11:53 pm GMT

    Saphire_Kitsune
    I get the mature games part of it, but why consoles too?

    They're attempting to do a V-chip kind of thing. Of course there's a problem with that.
    A. Either the publisher has to wait until the game has been rated before they begin production of the discs (so that if in the case of an AO or Mature game be marked as such and locked out if a parent so chooses) or.
    B. All owners of consoles must absolutely have a way to connect to the internet to pull that information down.

    The idea isn't terribly bad really, it would allow parents actually have a say in what their children play while they're at work or away from the house. However the logistics (and the costs) of such a thing will almost certainly make the console manufacturers howl.

  • Targzissian

    Posted May 31, 2007 11:53 pm GMT

    I've no problem with sensible legislation to protect minors from depictions of violence and depravity, but that means defining things rigorously enough and with enough detail that the industry will know which games meet the criteria of "depictions of depraved violence and indecent images." I don't see anything wrong with fantasy depictions of killing monsters, as that has always been a part of youth.

  • Raxxon

    Posted May 31, 2007 10:28 pm GMT

    WHO IS PROTECTING US FROM THESE INQUISITION STYLE LEGISLATURES?

  • darth-revan

    Posted May 31, 2007 10:13 pm GMT

    This is another way to let the government control your lives, and control you. The day the governemtn controls art, is the day that freedom dies.

  • vhuynh67

    Posted May 31, 2007 10:10 pm GMT

    Eliot Spitzer and Hillary Clinton starred in the upcoming film "Dumb and Dumber - The Road to Presidency". Protecting children from violent video games. Yes that right baby while showing them indecent shows on primetime and disturbing images from Iraq during the evening news. My young kids are no longer allowed to watch network TV. They are only allowed to play Halo and Gears co-op with me. Stupid NY state lawmakers.

  • Tokanite

    Posted May 31, 2007 9:48 pm GMT

    Just in time for GTA IV huh, NYC? Maybe this is their backlash against the fact that the next gen GTA is based in their city.

  • Saphire_Kitsune

    Posted May 31, 2007 9:47 pm GMT

    "It would also prohibit the sale of home gaming consoles without parental restriction options and establish an advisory council to appraise the work of the Entertainment Software Rating Board."

    I get the mature games part of it, but why consoles too?

  • Seraphim_24

    Posted May 31, 2007 9:43 pm GMT

    How about spending my tax payer dollars trying to solve real problems like the price of Gas?

  • PacoL250

    Posted May 31, 2007 9:10 pm GMT

    I said it before and I'll say it again: NY, the punishment DOES NOT fit the crime. This screams unconstitutional and this will sooner or later get blasted in court.

  • KIM7813

    Posted May 31, 2007 8:59 pm GMT

    I hate human stupidity and this is no exception! People blaming video games for violent behavior and now making it a felony to sell M-rated games to a minor. Parents should do what's right and not let the government raise their kids. I hate how parents dump the responsibility on other people (teachers, social workers and government officials).

    Why can't parents do their job and not make the suffering of many payback for the actions of one? BTW, I'm talking about parents who don't want to be parents and dump their kids for no apparent on another without permission or notice.

  • reaverx13

    Posted May 31, 2007 8:34 pm GMT

    O.K. so if some dude sells a game that is rated m to a minor is going to jail......this is a big load of sh*t For god's sake what the hell is going on. Politicians should stay the hell away from games. There are many many kids that are mature enough to play this games. >.> if politicians think they are protecting kids from violent video games they are wrong. There's still many many forms of violence around the world and what video games are the worst of them all?.....yea way to waste people tax money. What's next some dude get arrested for selling Mario to a minor on the count of Mario squishing some lil gomba is deemed to violent for a kid...Parents should be the ones thinking to whether to buy the game for the kid and to make sure he/she is mature enough to play the game. Not the government god its like saying all gamer kids are going to grow up and be shooting up their schools or something. So yea back off politicians. Leave the gaming problem to us gamers.

  • YukoAsho

    Posted May 31, 2007 8:15 pm GMT

    Lumen - Oh, their decision is informed. You think they WANT one of these laws passed? If violent video games went away, they'd lose a precious scapegoat to hide their own blatant idiocy. Spending $500,000 in their own lawyer fees and reimbersing the ESA another $500,000 is worth it to these petty politicians. I don't even bat an eye anymore, really.

  • Lumenadducere

    Posted May 31, 2007 8:01 pm GMT

    Seriously, don't politicians have better things to spend their time on? Stricter controls on M rated games being sold to minors I can totally understand, but the fact that this is such a vague law and that it passed - while people noted that it was unconstitutional, mind you - really makes me worry. People shouldn't make uninformed decisions, and I highly doubt that any of these politicians know enough about video games or the industry to justify passing a law like this.

  • WeAreToast

    Posted May 31, 2007 7:50 pm GMT

    Considering you can just get somebody older to buy the games for you?

    Oh, and the use of the Schoolhouse Rock image was cool.

  • AzureWind213

    Posted May 31, 2007 7:35 pm GMT

    a law this vague could send you to jail if you work at the movie store down the street and you rent a teen-rated game to a teen only to later find out it was re-rated M because of :O HIDDEN CONTENT :O ... god, I love my state. We are so damn smart and full of our selves(our representative government, that is) that we don't even care about wasting all our tax dollars... this is all about making spitzer look good and making it look like NY legislators actually care. If the politicians actually cared around here, they would work with the ESRB, the experts on the issues, to develop a penalty system for individual store employees who sell M-rated games to minors or dont preform ID checks. If you're sick, you don't go to a politician to get better. You go to the doctor. If you wanna keep this explicit material out of the hands of young gamers(which is the parents' job anyway), you work with the people who know what's T and what's M. Kathrynloch is right. Nothing gets accomplished this way. Lawmakers pretend like the constitution can just be put off during law-making sessions and our money gets wasted in appeals courts, telling them to stop screwing up.

  • kathrynloch

    Posted May 31, 2007 7:26 pm GMT

    Thanks Smoov_B and kudos to your mom Ishbuu.

    Unfortunately, law makers will continue to jump on their popularity band-wagons and legislate that way instead of real life. Heck, they are so immersed in politics, they don't know what real life is. Whatever is in the public eye gets their ADHD attention.

    Right after Katrina it was hurricane preparation and FEMA, after a child goes missing, its tighten the sexual predator laws, after Virginia Tech it's gun control. The list goes on and on. The problem is, they jump off one band wagon and onto another so fast, nothing gets accomplished. Hurricane season starts here June 1 (I lost my house in Hurricane Rita) and I've seen little improvement since then in preparedness. Is LA ready for another Katrina? I think not.

    Everyone here who said this video game regulation is a waste of taxpayer money is right - this will get over-turned in court after a few rounds in the various appeals cycles, then get stuck in the mire of the political wasteland as legislators have jumped onto the next band wagon.

  • the_bacon

    Posted May 31, 2007 7:08 pm GMT

    People need to realize something: no matter what the argument about video games, at the very core it is the parent's responsibility to be involved in what their children do, be it watching movies, listening to music, or playing a game. It disgusts me that politicians waste people's tax dollars on such inane matters.

    Seriously, it is not our government's job to moniter what the kids are doing. Senators and governers and such need to sort out their priorities. It's going to become a felony to sell an underrage child an M-rated game (or a game with similar content), yet they don't do anything about parents going into R-rated movies with their kids? How about music with explicit lyrics? Yeah, I think something's a bit off here.

    It isn't right that some worker at a local Wal-Mart or Gamestop is incarcerated because the game had content someone deemed unacceptable. Sure, if it's rated M and has gore and blood, then they should be punished, but jail is going too far. Isn't losing their job enough? But it's not just M games that are affected. The bill was vague, so anything a parent might object to could be enough to mess up the poor worker's life.

    The parent buying the game for their kids is another matter. It's lazy parenting that a father or mother absent-mindedly bought their kid an inappropriate game so that they would shut up. It is up to the parent to decide whether their offspring is mature enough for the content a game has. My parents bought me RE4 because they knew I wasn't an idiot. I know violence is wrong, and they know I know. They're not worried I'll massacre a group of innocent people because they know I can handle it. On the other hand, they carefully review every game my brother buys because he is still growing and learning, even if he's 10. It's the matter of good parenting, people.

    As for the kid debate, all children aren't the same. While there is the group of children who turn out fine, it's a fact that small kids are vulnerable to mature and adult content. Some kids think straight, others are confused, and still others see it as morally acceptable. Who needs to put the content into context? Who needs to explain things? The parents. And sometimes not even the parents. Kids lucky enough to have older siblings can go to them for help. I myself love my little brother and shield him from all content I know isn't good for his well-being. He's a smart kid, he knows that you shouldn't do the stuff he sometimes sees. He knows that just because he snuck an hour of RE4 behind my back that doesn't mean it's okay to get a shotgun and blow someone's brains out. Unfortunately, not all of the USA's youth are that lucky. That's why they need their parents. Ultimately, it all comes down to the parents.

    I know all of this has been said, but I couldn't read something like this without having my say. As teenage gamre, I feel I should be heard.

    PS: subrosian, you are the smartest and most mature person I have ever seen. This 15-year-old hopes to go on and become as awesome as you are. And have a larger vocabulary. :-P

  • dmf_pokerman

    Posted May 31, 2007 7:08 pm GMT

    As long I can buy them I don't give a **** And I can buy them. So thats that.

  • x-wing20

    Posted May 31, 2007 6:52 pm GMT

    Thank God for the ESA and EMA. If everything goes smoothly it will bw ok.

  • d3f1anc3

    Posted May 31, 2007 6:32 pm GMT

    Bottom line: it's up to the PARENTS to MONITER and CONTROL what their CHILDREN are DOING. All these bills and laws and legislation don't mean jack unless parents are taking responsibility for their children's actions and keeping questionable content out of their hands. And they won't be able too all the time either. One example of that - little Timmy goes over to Billy's house and Billy's mother is busy doing some work on the computer in the Den and leaves the two children to their own devices, so they pop in a copy of GTA or Manhunt Billy borrowed from a friend at school. Stuff like that.

    Politicians should get over themselves, it's beating a dead horse at this point, the ESRB and national retailers already implemented laws into restricting youth from purchasing / renting M rated games, and should just leave it at that. All the time, effort, and money going into this grand endeavor at this point just isn't worth it anymore. FFS the ESRB is THERE for a reason to actually PANEL interview all this media and give it a fair rating for the consumer to do what they will with it anyway. WE DON'T NEED A GOVERNMENT FACTION TO DO IT FOR THEM. It wouldn't even be objectionable anymore, politicians personal feelings and religion will come into the picture and royally **** everything up.

    Parents need to step up to the plate. End of story.

  • rainmanstile

    Posted May 31, 2007 6:15 pm GMT

    i undrstand that restricting games among kids is an issue and it has valid and bad points, my issue with it is the difficulty it's going to put on the rest of us in buying these games. think about how we treat porn and look at the way they want us to treat games.

  • By-tor_basic

    Posted May 31, 2007 6:06 pm GMT

    I still don't see the need for Gov't legislation for video game ratings. It's an industry lead consortium that says what's appropriate for which age group. Every company has a 'target' age group for each game, just like Hollywood and their movies .If some of YOU parents out there would pull your heads out of your butt and spend two minutes with your child and the console you bought him/her, you would have an idea of what is going on. You know what company's movies you can buy and are safe right? Disney, Dreamworks, and the like. Well the same goes for games too. Do a little research. I agree that mature games should not be in the hands of an eight year old, but I shouldn't have to suffer because some kids' idiot parents didn't read the label on a game or....god forbid...they didn't LOOK AT IT THEMSELVES AFTER THEY BROUGHT IT INTO THEIR HOME and see what they bought their kid. Sry for the caps but it really chaps me when we have stupid people out there who think they need the government to tell them whats best for them.

  • FFXSage

    Posted May 31, 2007 5:40 pm GMT

    And people want New York's Senator as President?
    Please... spare me.

    President Cleveland FTW: "I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution; and I do not believe that the power and duty of the General Government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit. A prevalent tendency to disregard the limited mission of this power and duty should, I think, be steadily resisted, to the end that the lesson should be constantly enforced that, though the people support the Government, the Government should not support the people."

    Parents should "protect" their own kids from these violent games and not need "mommy government" to do it for them. If I allow my son to play M rated games then that's my own business, government should stay out of it. Waste of taxes, waste of time, invasion of privacy, unconstiutional.

  • jbgarlin

    Posted May 31, 2007 5:38 pm GMT

    Haha, Lambprey you know nothing about me or my sense of justice. I was merely pointing out that if they make it illegal then it would be the same as selling other prohibited items to minors. Don't put words into my mouth. I never said that I agree with it. Just that they have the right to do it if written properly. Also, stop trying to compare this to rape, murder or treason. There are degrees of criminality (i.e. classes of felonies and misdemeanors). Trying to put this in the same degree as those is pointless and carries no weight.

  • cspiffo

    Posted May 31, 2007 5:37 pm GMT

    This will be overturned in Federal court. The Constitution applies to everyone; even kids! This is way out of line and the politicians should be ashamed of themselves waisting their taxpayers hard earned money on laws and lawyers knowing full well what the end result will be and all for what; to get their name in the papers posing as the "morally" correct Censorship of media is never OK. Why don't we all just live in Cuba!

  • Pittfan666

    Posted May 31, 2007 5:37 pm GMT

    Still won't stop me from giving games rated M to kids illegally, sticking it to the man.

  • Pete5506

    Posted May 31, 2007 5:27 pm GMT

    wow this is a little sad

  • UnrealPro

    Posted May 31, 2007 5:26 pm GMT

    Way to waste New York's tax dollars you douche bags.

  • tigerous

    Posted May 31, 2007 5:09 pm GMT

    Wow, this is seriously pathetic. The keep this up and eventually, no law abiding citizen will be able to play a video game. What is the world coming to? I mean, people need outlets. You tell them they can't do something and it's not going ot make things better. If anything, it will make things worse. Just look at prohibition. If they start passing bills like this across the entire country, I swear I'm moving out of the United States. The last thing I need is to be told one of the most enjoyable things in my life is going to send me to jail.

  • cyberkap-JL_QGJ

    Posted May 31, 2007 5:07 pm GMT

    Watch someone go to jail for selling lego star wars to a kid. it involves violence, slicing the "living lego people" in half.

  • Ishbuu-

    Posted May 31, 2007 5:06 pm GMT

    @ kathrynloch Thank you. You do what my mum did - she actually looked through the games I wanted. I wanted StarCraft and Diablo 2 when I was 8, she looked at em carefully and decided that I was mature enough to play such things (heh, seems responsible, though you'd have to know me at that age to understand why)

    Thank you kindly.

  • Kfoss

    Posted May 31, 2007 4:57 pm GMT

    yay for lost tax dollars!

  • flynsk

    Posted May 31, 2007 4:56 pm GMT

    Do you lose voters rights w/ a felony in NY?

  • whackedjob213

    Posted May 31, 2007 4:54 pm GMT

    Any law preventing people from buying games is stupid. Unless it becomes a crime to give M rated games to people under 17 nothing will happen. I can still go ask my brother to get me the new Manhunt, GTA, God of War or Hitman and once its out of the store this law thinks it is irrelevant who plays the game. If you really want to enforce this stuff you need parents to be overbearing to their children which is not what anyone wants to happen. I'm 15 and buying M games isn't a problem and my parents don't care because they know I can handle it so this is just another law that will do nothing except waste taxpayers money and make the government feel like they accomplished something.

  • lamprey263

    Posted May 31, 2007 4:53 pm GMT

    "There is no difference between selling bourbon to a 15 year old and selling Manhunt to a 15 year old if the law makes them equal."

    You're right. If it's going to be "illegal", then selling a game is going to be just as "illegal" as anything else "illegal". Selling a M-rated game to a 17 year old will be just as bad as murder, or rape, or maybe even acts of treason. Jeez JB, I hope your kids can grow up to inherit your sense of justice.

Subscribe to GameSpot's YouTube Channel

Hot Stories

Newsmakers

Featured Stories

Tags

bo andersen   ema   esrb   game bill   new york   ny

Submit News

Got tips? Send them in!