Analysis Of Brown Vs. Entertainment Merchants Association

In today’s time with the new head turning technology in video games most of the games have some sort of violence present in them. Many games past and present incorporate some kind of violence such as, killing with weapons, using explosives, and crashing cars. With all of the present day technology all activities portrayed during in-game scenarios are becoming more and more realistic. In 2005 the state of California enacted a law to ban the sale of certain violent games to children without the consent of their parents. The law was created based upon the idea that with the realistic in-game events real behavior could be drastically effected by the violence. The worries are that tragic events such as massacres could occur based on ideas seen in games. Incidents such as high school shooting have heightened concerns of potential connections between violent games and violent actions.

“According to data recently released by The NPD Group, in 2012, U.S. video game software sales reached $6.7 billion (174.8 million units) and computer game sales were $380 million (13.2 million units)” (Improving Economy). To many, the violent video game industry has turned all adolescents into mass murderers. However, they’re absolutely wrong. Very seldom do adolescents who play violent video games commit acts of violence, and the ones who do usually have a mental disorder. Instead of blaming the tragedies that occur on violent video games, the news media should explain to people that a large percentage of young males play violent video games, indicating that the two are uncorrelated. They should alternatively research other possible solutions to the crisis. In lieu of negatively affecting people’s lives, video games could potentially improve their lives!

In 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the case of Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association that a 2005 law restricting the sale of violent video games to those under the age of 18 was unconstitutional. The court ruled that the law was not backed by scientific evidence and therefore goes against the first amendment, which requires proof of harm in order to violate. The case came about after a group of politicians expressed concern about the effects violent video games had upon children. Prosecutor Stefen F. Gruel fought in favor of the ban, citing studies and research which displayed a correlation between violent video games and violence in children. Whereas defense attorney Patricia A. Millett argued that the research was not thorough enough and that there is substantial evidence that negates the research Gruel’s used to argue his case. With the ever-increasing video game industry, it is important to fully understand the impacts such technology is having on children positive and negative. I believe that the evidence does not support a correlation between violence in video games and violence in children, though it does support the causation of other possible negative effects. I also do not think the government establishing a ban on violent video games for minors would greatly reduce the number of children playing them due to the culture of violence in the United States.

The Court decided that there was not enough substantive proof that video games established causality between violent video games and violent behavior. The Court then found that the California law did violate minors First Amendment right.

The final case is the BURWELL v. HOBBY LOBBY STORES case; this case can be

According to the plaintiff in the Coleman v. Kohl’s Department Stores, Inc., et al., Case No. 15-cv-2588 (N.D. Calf.). In June of 2015 Kohl’s Department Stores Inc. allegedly used ambiguous and misleading language to obtain credit reports from job applicants in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). As a result of the confusing and misleading application materials, plaintiff alleges that Kohl’s obtained a credit report and claims that Kohl’s willfully violated a recent warning by the (FTC) Federal Trade Commission to display background check disclosures to job applicants in plain language and on a separate document.

97% of teens ages 12-17 play video games today. They contribute to the growing industry of video games which is now at $21.53 billion (ProCon.org). In your life you have most likely played some type of video game, such as a game on your phone or on your computer. Did that game make you feel like you wanted to cause violence? Violent video games do not cause mass shootings, it allows kids to relieve their stress, and it is the competitive nature, not the violence in video games.

It may seem odd that one would think that a video game could possibly have a negative effect on children. Especially when you discover all of the logical fallacies in their argument. Although some people have some decent points, most studies done on this subject have no direct correlation with the violence in children that happen to play violent video games. A study done in 2008, deemed with the title “Grand Theft Childhood” reported that 60% of middle school boys who played at least one M-rated game had previously hit or beat up another

According to U.S. News, “video game sales are one of the biggest markets in the U.S. and with that juvenile crime rates have decreased.” Because of violent video games many teens and young adults are playing the games instead of going outside and committing crimes. According to BBC News, “the long term consequences of crime and actual violent behavior, there is no evidence linking violent video games with that. Violent video games are played by millions of people, and very few commit crimes connected to playing violent video

On October 21, 2005, Brandon Nadeau published the article “Video Games Make Society Less Violent” in The Daily Campus, The University of Connecticut. In the article he states that society has become less violent due to video games because in accordance with statistics, the number of violent crimes has decreased since video games have been introduced. For instance, since the release of PlayStation in 1995, the violent crime rate has decreased every year. Furthermore, he provides the results of comparative research where gamers were asked to play a game for several hours and where some were asked to watch violent movies. These results were unexpected because the games gave people something to do while the movie made them sit and watch, making

Video game violence and youth violence don't connect to each other based on juvenile crime rates. In fact, game sales have gone up 204% while crime rates lowered dramatically by 37% in the same time period.this info came from the us sales department and us crime rate index. This means that crime rate almost cut in half and game sales doubled is the same time period. Equally important, the us sales department and crime rate index say that in one month if that month came out with a new game they would knows is that crime rates would go down in that same month. This means that the higher that sales the less crime in that same time period. All in all, with this evidence I can say that the more games sold the less crime there is in that same day,

Video games are teachers that involve players into the virtual world. Nowadays, many video games include violence in many of its aspects such as war, stealing, slaying and many more. According to Video Games ProCon, “10 of the top 20 best-selling video games in the US contained violence.”(ProCon, 2014), they also believe that violent video games have not only cons but also pros; they stated that “Violent juvenile crime in the United States has been declining as violent video game popularity has increased. The arrest rate for juvenile murders has fallen 71.9% between 1995 and 2008. The arrest rate for all juvenile violent crimes has declined 49.3%. In this same period, video game sales have more than quadrupled.” (ProCon, 2014). However, the RWJF Blog team stated that the California law describes Violent Video Games as a “video game in which the range of options available to a player includes killing, maiming, dismembering, or sexually assaulting an image of a human being.” (Fisk, 2010) meaning that when playing those games, the player is not left with any option to resolve the issue but the previous ones. Many people believe that Violent Video Games may have a negative impact on minors. According to the case, the legislature of the California state propagated a law that bans underage minors from buying or renting video games that include any form of violence, they believe that those games promotes the feelings of aggression among minor players. The law was

Description: The U.S. Supreme Court denied a request from Google to hear a case in which it was accused of infringing Oracle copyrights by using Java in its Android mobile operating system.

Anyone who has played a video game knows there is a commonality of violence throughout the genres and ratings, because of this there is the ongoing argument that the influence video game violence causes real life violence. In order to curb the growing aggression in today's youth many parents support the idea of regulating children’s access to the video games they blame with the government and lawmakers. However many would argue that games aren’t to blame and, in fact, can help children with social bonding and harmless venting. There really is no solid ruling to support either standing, but should there be laws around the video games accessible to children or should this stay a matter varied by individual opinions?

The company that I have conducted a research on is Harrah’s Entertainment, Inc. It is a casino gaming company in America that has been in operation since many decades. The company was founded by Bill Harrah and has an annual revenue of $8.6 billion. Harrah’s has gone on to become the world’s largest gaming company by the use of analytics that has left behind its competitors by a huge margin. Their primary focus is customer loyalty which provides customer satisfaction and would make the customers want to come back again and play more games thereby increasing the overall revenue of the company. They use predictive models to predict the likes and dislikes of the customers and provide loyalty incentive programs to target certain customers.