This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2010, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

The video-game industry and the state of California are engaged in their own version of Mortal Kombat, a battle that will determine whether interactive games are protected by the First Amendment as are movies and books.

The arena is the U.S. Supreme Court, where arguments were heard last week over a 2005 California law that bans the sales of violent video games to minors, much like pornography and alcohol.

"If people understood some of the more beautiful games out there, they would see that it is an artistic medium and has cultural value, and that expression should be treated the same as books and movies," said Josh Jones, a programmer for Salt Lake City-based Smart Bomb Interactive, who is chairman of the Salt Lake/Provo chapter of the International Game Developers Association.

Nationally, industry officials are speaking out about the issue. "As a game developer, I am disheartened and a little perplexed to see my art and passion lumped in with cigarettes and booze," Daniel Greenberg, a Washington-based video game writer and designer, wrote in a recent Washington Post op-ed.

In Arnold Schwarzenegger v. Entertainment Merchants Association (EMA), both sides argued before the court Nov. 2 whether government can ban the sale of a "deviant," violent video game to a minor.

The U.S. Court of Appeals earlier struck down the law as unconstitutional, before California appealed the ruling. It could be months before the Supreme Court issues its written ruling.

At issue are games such as "Grand Theft Auto," "Manhunt" or "Postal 2," a shoot-em-up game in which a player can burn people alive and then urinate on them as they are dying. In "Grand Theft Auto," players can kill prostitutes with a baseball bat and steal their money.

"Our concern is that it gives rewards — points that players can achieve — as they progress," said Jan Garbett, vice president of Women for Decency, a Salt Lake City-based family values group that supports the California law. "They get points for violent acts and sexual acts."

But video game developers believe their medium is a new expressive form of digital, interactive art, and therefore should be protected by the First Amendment.

Jones, the Salt Lake City programmer, mentions games such as "Indigo Prophecy" or "Alan Wake," describing them as works of art with serious stories in which the player interacts with the story. "If people were more aware of these, they would see that those kind of graphic depictions are integral to the story to understand the psyche of the character," he said.

In his argument before the justices, EMA attorney Paul M. Smith made a similar point, contending that laws banning video games are just a knee-jerk reaction.

"We have a history in this country of new mediums coming along and people vastly overreacting to them, thinking the sky is falling, our children are all going to be turned into criminals," Smith said, according to a transcript of the arguments. "It started with the crime novels of the late 19th-century, which produced this raft of legislation which was never enforced. It started with comic books and movies in the 1950s."

Yet proponents of restricting video game content cite studies from the American Psychological Association and American Academy of Pediatrics that suggest media violence can lead to more aggressive behavior in children.

There are video-game ratings already in place for parents, and retailers such as Wal-mart and Best Buy say they already police the sale of mature-rated video games. Yet critics say children can still routinely get access to violent titles.

"What about the 19-year-old behind the counter who loves those games himself? And his best friend comes over with his little brother, and he knows the guy, and he sells it to him," Garbett said about retailers who violate their own policy of not selling games to minors. "No one can go after that store. It has to be stronger than that policy."

vince@sltrib.com. Twitter: @ohmytech. —

Summary: Video games in court

The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments Nov. 2 over whether state governments can ban the sales of violent video games to minors.

• The case involves a California law that already was ruled unconstitutional by two lower courts.

• Utah has tried to pass its own law making stores civilly liable for selling mature-rated games to minors. But the 2009 bill was vetoed.

• Proponents of the California law say violent games can lead to more aggressive behavior in children.

• Game developers believe video games are art and therefore protected by the First Amendment.