California Judge blocks violent videogames law

A preliminary injunction halting the implementation of the California violent videogames law has been issued, mirroring similar judicial rulings in other American States.

The California law, signed by Governor Schwarzenegger and due to be implemented at the beginning of 2006, was deemed unconstitutional and its supporting evidence called into question. The decision follows legal rulings in Michigan and Illinois just prior to the Christmas Period, and marks another small victory for the games industry trade bodies fighting the implementation of the bills, such as the Entertainment Software Association.

ESA president Douglas Lowenstein commented: "We are extremely pleased by the announcement. We deeply respect the concerns of the Governor and the Legislature that gave rise to the law. For the sixth time in five years, Federal Courts have now blocked or struck down these state and local laws seeking to regulate the sale of games to minors based on their content, and none have upheld such statutes."

"It is therefore time to look past legislation and litigation in favour of cooperative efforts to accomplish the common goal of ensuring that parents use the tools available to control the games their kids play.

The ESA continues to promote the industry's own videogames ratings system from the Entertainment Software Ratings Board, and recently applauded the major console manufacturers for implementing complex parental controls as standard in the next-generation games consoles. It is the ESA's unwavering belief that a combination of self-regulatory and co-operative protective measures will perfectly serve both consumers and the games industry itself - without the need for unconstitutional laws.

Lowenstein added: "We believe that between the ESRB ratings, parental education, and now with the announcement that all next generation consoles will have parental controls, there is a wealth of ways that those concerned can ensure that children do not have access to inappropriate games. In sum, we believe a combination of parental choice and parental control is the legal, sensible, and most importantly, effective way to help parents keep inappropriate video games from children, and we dedicate ourselves to working with all parties to accomplish this goal."

Another trade body, the Interactive Entertainment Merchants Association, has been working closely with the ESA to combat the implementation of violent videogame laws. Commenting on the latest decision, IEMA president Hal Halpin stated: "Our position has been, and shall remain, that Government should not be involving itself in the entertainment decisions that consumers make. Our members are already voluntarily committed to a self-regulatory process and games should be treated no differently than music or movies in how they are merchandised, sold and enjoyed."

"Judge Whyte's preliminary injunction reaffirms our long-held position that these laws are unconstitutional and unnecessary. It is unfortunate that politicians have chosen not to respect the will of the courts and of the people, and it is our continued hope that they will now, given the extraordinary amount of precedent, choose to instead work proactively with us," Halpin concluded.

The battle may have been won, but the war is far from over. Whilst the court rulings may have temporarily blocked the implementation of the laws, there is no guarantee of a permanent injunction and the state level battles may well be overshadowed by the recent introduction of Senator Clinton's Family Entertainment Protection Act to congress.

Similar to the state laws, Clinton's FEP Act would impose fines of USD 1000 or 100 hours of community service for the first act of selling Mature or Adults-Only games to minors, with USD 5000 or 500 hours for each additional offence. An investigation into the accuracy of the ESRB ratings system would also be called for, should the federal act be passed.