![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif?v=91.6){kind=small}
Let's call this one the "Battle in the Bayou."
Assuming that Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco signs Rep. Roy Burrell's video game bill into law, it will, of course, trigger a First Amendment challenge by the video game industry. Nothing new there. We've seen such court cases many times before, in Illinois, Michigan, California and elsewhere.
But this is shaping up as something far more than a court battle. This fight comes equipped with baggage. Lots of baggage.
Controversial Miami attorney and anti-game crusader Jack Thompson wrote Rep. Burrell's bill and testified on its behalf in the Louisiana legislature. Thompson's incessant e-mails are already crowing about yesterday's success in the Louisiana Senate, where the bill passed 35-0
Doug Lowenstein, of course, is the president of the ESA, and the video game industry's point man.
These two do not like each other. In fact, they really don't like each other.
For his part, Thompson says such outrageous and ugly things about Lowenstein that GP wonders why the ESA boss doesn't sue the gadfly attorney for defamation.
The ESA, on the other hand, has placed Thompson on their "ignore" list. They like to pretend he doesn't exist.
Thompson has been issuing frothy assertions about video game violence for years, but 2006 saw his first real foray into the legislative arena. He's been studying past video game rulings, trying to craft a bill that will withstand the inevitable First Amendment challenge. In addition to Louisiana's Burrell, Thompson has been working with Delaware Rep. Helene Keeley (D), although it's unclear whether Keeley's bill will advance.
For his part Lowenstein has guided the industry with a steady hand for more than a decade. The ESA has never lost a constitutional challenge on his watch. Although he's too much of a professional to ever say it, you can bet he's determined not to lose this one. Especially this one.
Stay tuned. This is one fight you won't want to miss.
Update: Jack Thompson commented that he has had some state-level exposure in the past. "I was the chief witness for the Washington State bill two years ago," he said in an e-mail.
Want to talk about it? You can discuss this story via the "comments" feature (click below), or in the new GamePolitics Forums...
June 7 2006, 15:34:07 UTC 5 years ago
I want entertainment...
Please, please, PLEASE post some of Jacky Boy's emails about this one. His rantings are an endless source of entertainment for me. ;)June 7 2006, 17:34:33 UTC 5 years ago
Re: I want entertainment...
I don't think that would be in good taste. Besides, it makes him look crazier when you ignore him and he keeps yelling at you.5 years ago
June 7 2006, 15:45:24 UTC 5 years ago
Hmm... wonder if anbody will throw a chair...
*waves GO ESRB flag, has big foam finger*
June 7 2006, 15:51:49 UTC 5 years ago
WITH REFEREE MILLS LANE
I want a good, clean fight. Now let's get it on!June 7 2006, 19:02:52 UTC 5 years ago
Re: WITH REFEREE MILLS LANE
You get a cookie. *cookie*We also need Michael Buffer as the ring announcer. :D
5 years ago
June 7 2006, 16:32:27 UTC 5 years ago
What e-mails?
Is he harrasing you again Dennis?June 7 2006, 17:33:05 UTC 5 years ago
Re: What e-mails?
Again? He never stopped. He sends him e-mails every other day, and he likely still posts on the comments section daily. He knows that at the very least, Dennis will see his posts.5 years ago
5 years ago
June 7 2006, 17:01:48 UTC 5 years ago
"These two do not like each other. In fact, they really don't like each other."
I think that was obvious, i mean, there was a number of usernames he had used that indicated that fact.
"The ESA, on the other hand, has placed Thompson on their "ignore" list. They like to pretend he doesn't exist."
Who honestly wouldn't? If someone like that keeps bashing on many things, he can be legally found as psychotic or hitting that age. Can't let an old man do that to ya, so instead of making a miserable old man realize how miserable he really is, let him be. Best action i think they are doing.
If I had lived in the state, I'd honestly go to this one. I'd even pay money to enter it.
June 7 2006, 17:24:00 UTC 5 years ago
Dennis, what is the big special difference about this law that gives Thompson the confidence to think it'll survive? Or is he just being delusional?
June 7 2006, 19:58:36 UTC 5 years ago
5 years ago
5 years ago
5 years ago
5 years ago
June 7 2006, 17:51:52 UTC 5 years ago
June 7 2006, 19:57:02 UTC 5 years ago
5 years ago
June 7 2006, 18:49:21 UTC 5 years ago
Hey, GP...
Call me crazy, but I think I might know why Doug doesn't sue him. I have 2 theories. One, and probably the least likely of the two is that like us, though he does know that the nutjob is a definitely an entity, Mr. Lowenstein finds Jack moderately amusing but more of a minor annoyance. The second, and the one I think is the most likely, is that he knows that even if he sued the lawsuit-happy lawyer and won, Jack would still keep coming back blowing his horn and keeping his ugly legal noisehole pried open with a crowbar. In fact, he'd probably turn around and declare that the suit was proof that he's right and the gaming industry is simply trying a less violent method, a.k.a. not sending in their squad of crack commando gamers trained to perfection on GTA to end his "fight for justice, the children and God", to get him out of the picture. Does this seem at all likely?June 7 2006, 19:56:08 UTC 5 years ago
Re: Hey, GP...
both scenarios are entirely plausible. Doug obviously has his reasons. I know my thoughts on the matter would run in a different direction than Doug's.5 years ago
5 years ago
5 years ago
5 years ago
5 years ago
5 years ago
5 years ago
5 years ago
5 years ago
June 7 2006, 23:36:30 UTC 5 years ago
Deleted comment
June 8 2006, 00:26:33 UTC 5 years ago
Re: I for one want to see the bill passed...
I don't know that a First Amendment loss would add up to being "publicly discredited." If that were the case there would be pols in Michigan, Illinois, etc who have been publicly discredited. I think people see that as the typical win-lose that happens on appeals.5 years ago
June 8 2006, 01:01:13 UTC 5 years ago
A lot of people call Jack a modern day Frederick Wertham (the anti-comic dude), but he's not. Fred had more credibility. I'm amazed that there is such a staggering amount of evidence showing that Jack is wrong.
June 8 2006, 05:24:01 UTC 5 years ago
Actually
I'd say he's more of a Joe McCarthy type. Witch Hunts with no credibilty, claims that were false, and wowing people.June 8 2006, 01:20:43 UTC 5 years ago
And, like the house vote, it wasn't unanimous either. 35-0, with four either absent or not voting.
June 8 2006, 01:51:24 UTC 5 years ago
Oh and a column about the Columbine internet game I found
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/livIt was in the Times-Picayune today.
5 years ago
5 years ago
5 years ago
5 years ago
June 8 2006, 03:59:43 UTC 5 years ago
Wow! How does IGN get so many great scoops?
June 8 2006, 08:01:22 UTC 5 years ago
More people read GP than we know...
June 8 2006, 04:44:02 UTC 5 years ago
The two [Thompson and politicians] are using each other for mutual gain; Jack gets to push his Victorian views on the public and your local representative gets a chance to move up the ranks. We aren't going to find rhyme nor reason in anything to do with games in legislature for a long time to come because of it, and in the end all anyone can really do is deal with it and let the ESA repeatedly beat them in court. None of these are drafted to pass into law, and everyone knows it.
We should actually be thankful that someone as shortsighted and extremist as Jack has come to prominence, as opposed to someone that knows what the hell they're doing and uses his/her position to deface gaming in the public eye. Thompson is either preaching to the choir or converting the ignorant right now, whereas someone with competence would be trying to make gains outside their circle of influence. Most reasonable people laugh him off in the same way they do Ann Coulter; it's actually worse in that sense because Coulter at least inspires national outrage every once in a while. It's all good baby.
June 8 2006, 08:04:21 UTC 5 years ago
5 years ago
June 8 2006, 07:45:04 UTC 5 years ago
SNAKES ON A PLANE.
FIRSTAMENDMENTFIRSTAMENDMENTFIRSTAMENDMEJeez, when will this stop? Once it reaches Supreme Court or whatever, a judge will knock it down.
Oh, and if it is ratified, will I be able to still play GTA or HL2 when I visit my grandmother in Louisiana?
June 8 2006, 18:15:38 UTC 5 years ago
Chilling Effect.
The biggest problem I see with that reasoning is that Writs of Certiorari doesn't grow on trees. It can take years for a case to get to the Supreme Court level. Who knows how many people are going to be in prison and/or run out of business while the process occurs? And who wants the trouble of defending themselves vs. a law like this? The lawyer's bill might still run them out of business. Even if it's struck down it'll have the chilling effect JT and Co. want.Hopefully the appellate court will do the right thing and end this quickly.