US Supreme Court to hear video game case

Los Angeles: Leland Yee didn't intend to become the frontman for the crusade against video game violence. But a law written by the Democratic state senator who represents San Francisco and San Mateo has ended up as the national test case for whether and how the government can regulate video games.

The law would ban the sale of video games deemed "ultra violent" to children under 18. The US Supreme Court yesterday agreed to hear an appeal by the state of California of a lower court's decision in 2007 to overturn Yee's law, which was signed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2005 but is not in effect because of an injunction.

Lee spoke to Facetime about what he thinks about video games and his role in the debate over them.

Are you surprised that a bill you wrote may end up deciding the role of government in the video game business?

I always felt that the way we crafted this bill was the right approach to go after ultra-violent video games. I was disappointed that there was an injunction put in place and we lost our first appeal, but I'm very pleasantly surprised that the Supreme Court is taking a look at this issue.

Out of all the ways to help children, why did you end up becoming so active in video games?

I was always interested in the influence of violence on TV and in the movies on children. But what this new technology presents is really over the top. One reason is the interactive nature, the fact that you can push a button and make certain horrific things happen. If you demonstrate to a child that you can do these things, it becomes part of their repertoire for dealing with anger. In addition, as you play these games over and over again, you become desensitised.

You don't play video games. How can you call for regulation of a medium you're not very familiar with?

That is a fair criticism. I'm not a player. But I have seen individuals who play these games. I have seen individuals using a baseball bat and bludgeoning a hooker to death, or taking a gun and shooting a cop. Those are the direct result of someone pushing a button and making a conscious decision.

Do you think video games are an art form? Do game creators deserve freedom of expression?

This is where some critics misunderstand me. I think video games are artful and it takes a lot of creativity to make them. I also think the interactive nature of them and the technology behind them can have great educational value. I'm just saying children ought not to be allowed to access them unless a parent buys it for them.