"This is the same technology the armed forces use to help soldiers kill the enemy," said state Sen. Leland Yee, the San Francisco Democrat who wrote the legislation. "All we're saying is, 'Don't sell it to kids.' "

I predict this appeal will get them absolutely nowhere, though I suppose we can't fault them for using taxpayers' money to check back every now and then, just in case the Constitution changed while we weren't looking.

California violent-video-game law faces showdown in federal appeals court [Mercury News via Gamasutra]

Consumer site GameCyte recently interviewed Sen. Yee and asked him to explain why he thinks games are more dangerous than other forms of violent media, such as films and television:

LY: Well, the bill that we had, that was signed into law, is a bill that deals with interactive violent video games. It's not just any violent video game - it is the interactive nature of these violent video games that are particularly harmful to our children. This is where literally, youngsters are sitting with their computer and pushing buttons not hundred s of times, but thousands - hundreds of thousands of times, whereby their action is coordinated with what happens to a human being, what happens to an individual. So pushing a button will then decapitate someone. Pushing a button will hack of a limb of a particular individual, burn some individual. It is this interactive nature that connects your behavior to a particular consequence that is particularly horrific.

think there's two major problems with the ESRB (the rating board): one is that there is a conflict of interest. The money that is used to sustain their particular activity is paid by the industry — the industry that that board is supposedly trying to regulate. So long as you have that conflict of interest, there's no way that anyone's going to believe that these rating scores are going to be objective.

Number two, the ratings are not valid; because the way in which you determine those ratings is that you get a snippet of these particular video games. The industry will provide you with some of the information that causes one to rate in a particular way. So, getting the information from the industry; number two, not being able to look at all the content, the rating system is a flawed and an invalid system. It is those two reasons that I don't believe that the ESRB is accurate for our parents to make some informed decisions about whether or not these games are appropriate for kids.

Discussing Game Violence with Maturity: Senator Leland Yee [GameCyte]

Yee's press release then reminds parents with some questionable wording that Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas was "found" to have "graphic scenes of oral sex, nudity, and simulated intercourse" and paints a dire picture of ratings enforcement.

In related news, I issued my own warning to parents, urging them to, you know, look at the four guns on the cover and the girl fellating a lollipop and think for a second if their kids should be playing that. And that the answer was no, moron. Only Senator Yee's press release is after the jump, though.

Senator Yee Urges Parents to Avoid Latest Ultra-Violent Video Game Thursday, April 24, 2008

Latest Grand Theft Auto Video Game to be Released Tuesday

SACRAMENTO - Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco/San Mateo), the author of California's law attempting to prohibit the sale of extremely violent video games to minors, today urged parents to avoid purchasing the latest graphically violent video game - Grand Theft Auto (GTA) IV - scheduled for release on Tuesday, April 29. GTA IV, the newest in the ultra-violent video game series, is expected to be the year's most popular game despite its rating of M (Mature) for adult audiences.

"It is imperative that parents avoid purchasing this game for their children and always review the video games their children are playing," said Yee, who is also a child psychologist. "Unfortunately, the makers of Grand Theft Auto have a history of deceiving the ratings board and the public on the true content of their games. Parents beware: this game undoubtedly glorifies violence, is extremely realistic and designed for adults only."

In June 2005, the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) and GTA's creator Rockstar, were involved in a multi-million dollar scandal called "Hot Coffee," in which Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, a game originally rated M by the ESRB, was found to have hidden animations allowing players to watch graphic scenes of oral sex, nudity, and simulated intercourse. The scandal resulted in the game being pulled from most store shelves, a $2.75 million class-action settlement, and the stocks of the Rockstar's parent company (Take Two Interactive) losing nearly half their value.

The ESRB rates a game based solely on a short video clip and information supplied by the game's maker and does not actually play or review the full content of the game. While M-rated games are designed for adults, there is no prohibition to selling such games to children. In fact, the Federal Trade Commission reports that 42 percent of unaccompanied children 13 to 16 years of age can successfully purchase M-rated games.

In addition, a recent report by the National Institute on Media & the Family found complacency among retailers, parents and the gaming industry regarding video game rating awareness, enforcement and usage. Among the report's highlights was a retailer grade of C-, with national retailers receiving a D and rental stores collecting a failing (F) grade. The game industry as a whole received a C and the ESRB received a C+.

Yee's 2005 law to prohibit the sale of extremely violent video games to minors in California is currently being litigated in the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. A bill authored by Yee in 2004, which has gone into effect, requires video game retailers to post signs informing consumers of the video game rating system.

Parents can learn more about GTA IV by visiting various online parental resources including www.whattheyplay.com, www.commonsensemedia.com, and www.parentstv.org.

Pick games that require the player to come up with strategies and make decisions in a game environment that is more complex than punch, steal, and kill.

Yeah, I couldn't keep up with the theme towards the end there, but you get the point. Yee decided that he would get himself a little more notice as a crusader against violent gaming by issuing a helpful press release warning all of the parents out there that their adorable little children want to play Manhunt 2 and will stop at nothing to try and get you to buy it for them.

One such violent video, Manhunt 2, is on many children's wish list. It was recently revealed that the game - which many have called the most violent video game ever produced - has accessible content designed for an Adults-Only (AO) rating. Despite the graphically violent scenes which were supposedly removed in order to receive the downgraded Mature (M) rating, the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) has refused to re-rate the game.

My personal favorite tip? "Avoid the "first person shooter" and "third person shooter" killing-machine games." Killing-machine games? Is this a genre I've never heard of before? Does it involve a thresher?

I think the point I am trying to make here is that we need a game where we kill people with a thresher. Happy Holidays.

Yee Urges Parents to Avoid Violent Video Games when Holiday Shopping for Kids
Monday, November 26, 2007

Ultra-Violent Video Games Top Many Holiday Shopping Lists

SACRAMENTO - Citing potential harmful effects on minors, child psychologist and Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco/San Mateo) today urged parents and grandparents to avoid violent video game purchases for their children this holiday season.

"Eighty-seven percent of children between 8 and 17 years of age play video or computer games and about 60 percent list their favorite games as rated M for Mature, which are games designed for adults," said Yee. "It is vitally important that parents and grandparents consider the content in video games before making holiday purchases. Regrettably, the rating system alone cannot be trusted, so parents should also carefully watch the content included in all their children's games."

One such violent video, Manhunt 2, is on many children's wish list. It was recently revealed that the game - which many have called the most violent video game ever produced - has accessible content designed for an Adults-Only (AO) rating. Despite the graphically violent scenes which were supposedly removed in order to receive the downgraded Mature (M) rating, the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) has refused to re-rate the game.

Manhunt 2 has been banned in England, and Target stores in the United States have refused to sell the game. The game is still readily available at Wal-Mart and other major retailers however.

Yee's 2005 law to prohibit the sale of extremely violent video games to minors in California is currently being litigated. A bill authored by Yee in 2004 which has gone into effect, requires video game retailers to post signs to inform consumers regarding the use of the video game rating system.

"Unfortunately, some parents don't realize that in many top selling games, the player actively participates in and is rewarded for violence, including killing police officers, maiming elderly persons, running over pedestrians, and torturing women and racial minorities," said Yee.

"These violent video games are learning tools for our children and can result in more aggressive behavior," said Randall Hagar of the California Psychiatric Association.

Parents and grandparents should consider the following before purchasing video games:

• Be aware of advertising and marketing to children. Advertising pressure contributes to impulse buying.

• Check the age ratings video game descriptors found on the box. Read other reviews, such as www.mediafamily.org, www commonsensemedia.org, and www.familymediaguide.com.

• Become familiar with the game.

• If there are violence and sexual themes in the title and cover picture, you can assume these themes are also in the game.

• Look for games involving multiple players to encourage group play.

• Pick games that require the player to come up with strategies and make decisions in a game environment that is more complex than punch, steal, and kill.

• Avoid the "first person shooter" and "third person shooter" killing-machine games.

• Discourage games that reward the player with more points or new scenes for anti-social and violent behavior.

For information on toy and product recalls, visit the United States Product Safety Commission website at www.cpsc.gov.

###

At this point in time, the ESRB has still not responded to anyone's request for clarification on the matter. And it's an important point because these changes dictate:

1. public response
2. commercial success
3. what game ratings actually constitute

Few of us compare the ESRB to the absurdity of old Hollywood, who forced actors to kiss in bursts as to not promote lewd necking and make the world into sex addicts. But it's tough to know without seeing a list of changes on paper.

The "Manhunt" problem [mercurynews]

On the flip side of that dispute, the Entertainment Software Association is seeking repayment of court costs associate with battling the California law, fees now well over $300,000. Game Politics has more details and fantastically alarmist politico quotes in their original report.

Schwarzenegger Appeals CA Game Law As Industry Seeks $320K Legal Fees [Game Politics]

Ahnuld's response to the ruling follows bill author Leland Yee's statement that he was personally "shocked" to learn of the unconstitutional ruling, urging the Governor to appeal the decision.

Obviously, Arnold and his team will need to determine if the ruling has the ability to bleed, as that is the determining factor whether such a thing can be killed. It's possible that the Governor will look into the eyes of Judge Whyte and inquire "What the hell are you?" or call him "One ugly son of a bitch." Then Whyte will initiate a self-destruct sequence in his alien gavel amid booming laughter. Sorry, just trying to add some flair to an otherwise dry turn of events.

BREAKING: Schwarzenegger Will Appeal CA Video Game Ruling [Game Politics]

The bill, authored by former child psychologist and then-speaker pro tem for the California State Assembly Leland Yee, was signed into law by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in October of 2005. Judge Whyte issued an injunction in December of that year, but did not issue a ruling on the law until today.

That law would have levied fines against retailers who rented or sold video games to minors that featured violence that was "especially heinous, cruel or depraved in that it involves torture or serious physical abuse to the victim."

BREAKING: California 2005 Video Game Law Ruled Unconstitutional [Game Politics]

Luke over at 1Up chatted with California politician Leland Y. Yee about freedom of speech and video games. Yee spearheaded a bill through the State Assembly that prohibits selling ultra-violent video games throughout the Golden State. Banning the sale of these games does not contradict First Amendment rights contests Yee.

"When you have information that says there are harmful effects to children - you have to draw the line. Just like adult material laws do not prevent anyone from producing adult movies and adult magazines, just don't let kids buy it, that's all," the politician said.

But, isn't that where the retailers and the ESRB come in? "The Federal Trade Commission's undercover study that nearly 70% of kids would be able to purchase an M-rated video game," he add. "More recently, the Harvard study says that the ESRB doesn't give accurate information."

Hal Halpin read Luke's piece and sent in the following retort: "It is unfortunate the Mr. Yee remains woefully uninformed regarding the FTC's findings with regard to voluntary retail efforts at self-regulation. He is either quoting an out-dated several year-old study, or has missed the press regarding their latest findings: that the nation's leading retailers, our members, are successfully carding for M-rated games 65% of the time - which puts the games industry on par with his "Gold Standard," the movie theatre owners, who card at 69% of the time."

If retailers (and hopefully parents) are handling the situation, should the government be regulating "ultra-violent" games as it does pornography? And honestly, should it let politicians that hob-knob with Paula Abdul propose legislation?

Luke's Article [1Up]

I mentioned last week that I interviewed Leland Yee for a story I was working on. The story, about gaming laws, ran today in the Rocky.

While most of it is a summation of where things currently stand, it's probably still worth reading for a few interesting tidbits.

Yee estimates that if his bill remained a law it would currently only have an impact on four or five of the games out there. He also says, though this didn't make the final cut of the story, that he doesn't think a similar law should be passed for movies. His argument is that they aren't as interactive and therefore not as harmful.

The other interesting thing is the current status of the three bills passed into law around the country. You'll notice that Michigan has basically given up, allowing the ESA to request the injuction to be made permanent. Illinois has decided to drop the violence part of its law and instead just try and keep the obscenity part, meaning the law would only restrict games that are obscene. And California is going full-on to protect its law.

I spoke with the Attorney General's office in California, and they sounded very adamant about defending the law. They even think this could be one that perhaps makes it to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Anyway, check it out to get all of the details and read what a First Amendment lawyer thinks about the whole thing, and then comment away.

Fighting Game [Rocky Mountain News]

To say that the list of those who participated is diverse would be an understatement, contributors include Dr. David Walsh of NIMF, Assembly Speaker Pro Tem Leland Yee, Running with Scissors CEO Vince Desi, Hot Coffee Modder Patrick Wildenborg and IEMA president Hal Halpin. Check out the full list and link to the podcast after the jump. I'm jealous I didn't think of this. Great idea Dennis.

1.) Tom Buscaglia, The Game Attorney http://www.gameattorney.com/
2.) Steve Glicker Gaming Steve http://www.gamingsteve.com
3.) Karleana, host of Gamer radio show http://www.thisisgamer.com
4.) Assembly Speaker Pro Tem Leland Yee architect of California s video game law
5.) Hal Halpin, president of IEMA www.iema.org
6.) Bobby Blackwolf, podcaster http://www.allgames.com/podcast/
7.) Darrin Gladstone, Assistant Editor, Computer Gaming World
8.) Shawn Sines, podcaster, Game On podcast www.dispatch.com/gameon
9.) Stephen Totilo, reporter, MTV News
10.) Andy from www.GamerAndy.com
11.) Dr. David Walsh National Institute on Media & the Family
12.) Kevin Haninger, researcher, Harvard University
13.) Bonnie Ruberg Heroine Sheik http://www.heroine-sheik.com
14.) Scott Jon Siegel - GamePolitics.com correspondent
15.) John Callaham www.GameCloud.com
16.) Trevor Ostrowski www.JiveMagazine.com
17.) Vince Desi CEO, Running with Scissors
18.) Patrick Wildenborg - Hot Coffee mod creator
19.) Dean Takahashi reporter, San Jose Mercury-News, author of Opening the Xbox
20.) Sean Bersell VP, Public Affairs, Video Software Dealers Association (VSDA) / Media Coalition 2006 Chair
21.) Brian Crecente & son www.Kotaku.com

GamePolitics Holiday Special Podcast Available Now!! [Game Politics]