A new bill in the US Congress would force retailers to card kids attempting to buy video games bearing M-for-Mature or AO-for-Adults Only ratings.
In addition to the identification-checking requirement, Reps. Jim Matheson (D-Utah) and Lee Terry (R-Neb.)'s Video Game Ratings Enforcement Act, introduced on Wednesday, would also require stores to post explanations of what the ratings, devised by the industry-backed Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB), actually mean, according to a press release. A copy of the bill's text was not immediately available on Thursday.The ESRB's ratings definitions say that games with an M-for-Mature rating "may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content, and/or strong language." Those with an AO-for-Adults Only rating "may include prolonged scenes of intense violence and/or graphic sexual content and nudity" and are recommended only for people age 18 or older.
Some stores already attempt to verify the age of game purchasers. For example, Wal-Mart says on its Web site that it already posts information about the ESRB ratings and has programmed its cash registers to automatically prompt sales clerks to check the age of the customer when M-rated games are scanned. GameStop also checks IDs before selling M-rated games.
"Video game ratings supposedly exist to protect children from material that is created for adults, but there is no consequence for irresponsible retailers who repeatedly sell these games to children," PTC president Tim Winter said in a statement. "The importance of this issue cannot be overstated when considering the array of games that include content too deplorable and disgusting to describe in detail."
However, previous legislative attempts to limit children's access to violent or sexually themed video games have not met with much success in the courts. Earlier this year, a federal appeals court upheld a lower court's decision to block a Minnesota law that would have imposed up to a $25 fine on minors younger than 17 caught buying or renting video games rated "M" for mature or "AO" for adults-only, citing, among other things, First Amendment concerns.
The Entertainment Software Association, which represents the video game industry, said that it shares the politicians' goal of ensuring that children have parental approval before playing certain games, but disagreed with their proposed method of doing so.
"Empowering parents, not enacting unconstitutional legislation, is the best way to control the games children play," said ESA President Michael Gallagher.
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6190608.ht … ws;title;7
In addition to the identification-checking requirement, Reps. Jim Matheson (D-Utah) and Lee Terry (R-Neb.)'s Video Game Ratings Enforcement Act, introduced on Wednesday, would also require stores to post explanations of what the ratings, devised by the industry-backed Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB), actually mean, according to a press release. A copy of the bill's text was not immediately available on Thursday.The ESRB's ratings definitions say that games with an M-for-Mature rating "may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content, and/or strong language." Those with an AO-for-Adults Only rating "may include prolonged scenes of intense violence and/or graphic sexual content and nudity" and are recommended only for people age 18 or older.
Some stores already attempt to verify the age of game purchasers. For example, Wal-Mart says on its Web site that it already posts information about the ESRB ratings and has programmed its cash registers to automatically prompt sales clerks to check the age of the customer when M-rated games are scanned. GameStop also checks IDs before selling M-rated games.
"Video game ratings supposedly exist to protect children from material that is created for adults, but there is no consequence for irresponsible retailers who repeatedly sell these games to children," PTC president Tim Winter said in a statement. "The importance of this issue cannot be overstated when considering the array of games that include content too deplorable and disgusting to describe in detail."
However, previous legislative attempts to limit children's access to violent or sexually themed video games have not met with much success in the courts. Earlier this year, a federal appeals court upheld a lower court's decision to block a Minnesota law that would have imposed up to a $25 fine on minors younger than 17 caught buying or renting video games rated "M" for mature or "AO" for adults-only, citing, among other things, First Amendment concerns.
The Entertainment Software Association, which represents the video game industry, said that it shares the politicians' goal of ensuring that children have parental approval before playing certain games, but disagreed with their proposed method of doing so.
"Empowering parents, not enacting unconstitutional legislation, is the best way to control the games children play," said ESA President Michael Gallagher.
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6190608.ht … ws;title;7
