Family Entertainment Protection Act Submitted to the US Congress

Remove all ads!

GameSpot has posted an article about three Democratic senators, Hillary Clinton, John Lieberman and Evan Bayh submitting the Family Entertainment Protection Act. Here's an excerpt describing what the senators propose in the bill:

Store managers would be fined up to $1,000 or 100 hours of community service for a first offense, and $5,000 or 500 hours of community service for each subsequent offense. Retailers can escape such fines if they were shown identification they believed to be valid or if their stores "have a system in place to display and enforce" the ratings system.

Beyond levying fines for retailers ignoring the ratings system, the bill would also require an independent annual analysis of the ratings system, and would expand the powers and responsibilities of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Clinton's legislation calls for the FTC to conduct an investigation into the prevalence of embedded inappropriate material not reflected in a game's rating (like the sex minigame in the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas Hot Coffee scandal). The bill would also require the FTC to accept consumer complaints about misleading or deceptive game ratings, and authorizes the commission to conduct an annual secret shopper audit of retailers to make sure they're playing by the new rules.

What do you think about the bill? Do you think it's restrictive or do you think it's bad now that ratings aren't enforced strictly? I think that ratings serve a purpose and if the ratings are on the box or otherwise easily accessible to retailers, there is nothing unconstitutional (in the light of the American constitution) in punishing them for still selling said games to minors and certainly nothing unduly restrictive. I even dislike GameSpot's title because it gives the wrong impression that there is an attack on games per se in place and I don't think that's an accident. Perhaps your opinion is different.

Read the whole thing at GameSpot.

 

The entire thing disgusts me. For the record I would feel the same way if three Republicans submitted the bill. Is it that hard for government to stay out of our lives. I'm not convinced that there is any proof that games effect people. Let the parents parent, if they choose not to it is their decision. Last time I checked there was nothing in the Constitution saying the government was supposed to regulate what little Timmy can buy.

 

Do films affect people and games not? What about porn magazines, is it legal to send them to children in the States?

 

In total agreement with Snook.

chev: It doesn't matter whether they do or don't - it's none of the government's business.

 

Consequently, cigarettes, alcohol and even drugs aren none of the government's business because it doesn't matter that they affect people. Is that what you were trying to say? Allow us all, even the underaged, to drink and smoke all we want?

 

Well looks like the over anxious keepers of public morality aka US Senators have finally woken up. At least this new proposal does not try to impose its own standards of what is and is not safe for non-adults.

As far as the proposal goes in trying to ensure that retailers follow ESRB ratings while selling games, I don't think that is a bad idea at all. All mass consumption goods and their sale & distribution are liable to follow regulations and standards imposed either by general consensus or by law. So why not games.

That however is It is quite possible that Hot Coffee was originally a part of the game but was dropped when they realised it would hamper their ratings. Parts being dropped midway and never making to the final product is not uncommon. And it may not always be economical for producers to entirely start afresh. We all know that the BG II mod Unfinished Business is made precisely for such content.

If we go by some of the ridiculousness going around about regulating game content, we just might end up with this.

 

Yes and No. The yes part is that it is none of the federal government's responsibility. The No part is that if it is a public health issue it can and should be handled at the local level (state, city, town). It is quite a stretch to say that the "mental trauma caused by gaming" is on par with the dangers of being drunk or getting cancer.

The morals of the community should not be set at the federal level. If a community wants to strictly enforce ratings to meet their "moral level" than good for them. Other communities may look at it as hogwash and do nothing. This lets the citizenry decide.

OT: To the alley????

 

@Shrikant ...Your link is both funny and scary.

I agree with The Great Snook. Ratings should be enforced at the local or state level. The more the Federal Government gets involved the closer we come to Big Brother. /looks over shoulder Oh,Oh I think he's here.

 

DO YOUR JOB AS A PARENT AND TAKE TIME AND INTEREST IN YOUR CHILDREN. Im so sick of our government saying they want smaller and smaller government and then spending time riding into our lives trying to 'protect' us from all the evils of the world.
ALl of this 'scandal' is due to the easteregg on GTA. Well I have news for you if your under 18 year old kid was playing that game, regardlesss of the easter egg,you are either asomeone who has taken the time to inform your kid about right and wrong choices in life and that games are just games or YOU ARE A BAD PARENT WHO NEVER TAKES THE TIME TO DO JUST THAT. AND do you really think the morals that you are trying to instill in your kids are on such flimsy and shaky ground that interaction with a game or a film or, GOD FORBID, a book that they will be shattered by that interaction?
WAKE UP PARENTS!!!!!
Sure there should be limits on what age you should be to buy things of questionable nature, but most parents will use this as a chance to NOT THINK and do thier jobs as parents. They would rather have the Government do it all for them.
WHY CANT JOHNNY READ? WHY DO KIDS COMMIT VIOLENT CRIME? WHY? Its notthe fault of companies trying to 'ruin the moral fabric of our nation', but STUPID parents who would rather BLAME someone else than take responsiblity for where they made mistakes. WAKE UP. You are the PARENT. You are the one in control. DO YOUR JOBS no matter how hard it may be. Dont make someone else do it for you, because if you keep doing that one day you will have no control and everyone else will be telling you what you should think and how you should live your life.

I saw a comic who said (and Im paraphrasing) They say video games make kids violent, because they act out what they do in the game in real life. Well Mario Brothers is one of the most popular games in the world and ive never seen a kid jump on another kids head to make a coin pop out of his butt.

 

Using the singular in that kind of argument is a fallacy. Children and teenagers don't just play one game. It's continuous exposure to a type of media.

So should there be ratings or not? It looks like you're defending a schizophrenical system in which ratings exist and it's supposed to be illegal to circumvent them but there are no legal consequences of actually doing that.

No. It's companies trying to make cash by selling sex and violence to teenagers.

Games are already rated, it's just about punishing retailers who don't care to take a look or don't mind selling it to someone below the age specified on the box. It's surprising how retailers fighting for their own skins and their own sweet cash manage to make a struggle for freedom for masses of people of that.

Kids emulate game characters and make themselves after them much like it is with books. Have you never seen a thirteen year old Counterstrike fan?

If you took violent games and gave them a comic-style makeover, they wouldn't be so interesting, wouldn't have so much and so easy influence and they would lose impact. You don't blow up terrorists (or policemen) the same way you pop a block with your head in Mario Brothers. Your next comparison is going to be Andersen and Marquis de Sade?