Error: The field at path '/readnext/contents[5]/uri' was declared as a non null type, but the code involved in retrieving data has wrongly returned a null value. The graphql specification requires that the parent field be set to null, or if that is non nullable that it bubble up null to its parent and so on. The non-nullable type is 'String' within parent type 'Content': {"response":{"errors":[{"message":"The field at path '/readnext/contents[5]/uri' was declared as a non null type, but the code involved in retrieving data has wrongly returned a null value. The graphql specification requires that the parent field be set to null, or if that is non nullable that it bubble up null to its parent and so on. The non-nullable type is 'String' within parent type 'Content'","path":["readnext","contents",5,"uri"],"extensions":{"classification":"NullValueInNonNullableField"}}],"data":{"articleData":{"uri":"/2011/07/28/analysis-of-decision-by-supreme-court-on-video-games/","canonicalUrl":"https://www.lawjournalnewsletters.com/2011/07/28/analysis-of-decision-by-supreme-court-on-video-games/","generatedId":"glf45ihjm","naturalId":"blogAndPostId/blog/post/382-5469","type":"ARTICLE","postFormat":null,"kickerPresentedBy":null,"presentedBy":"","title":"Analysis of Decision By Supreme Court on Video Games","readtime":"23","timeToRead":"23 minute","prettyModified":"","prettyDateTime":"July 28, 2011 at 03:21 PM","needToKnow":[],"byline":"James Chadwick and Thayer Preece","authors":[{"name":"James Chadwick","description":"","imageLarge":"https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/f16d6fc2845f417ea0e93a3f2b6cd37d?s=136&d=mm&r=g","webUrl":"/author/profile/james-chadwick/"},{"name":"Thayer Preece","description":"","imageLarge":"https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/f16d6fc2845f417ea0e93a3f2b6cd37d?s=136&d=mm&r=g","webUrl":"/author/profile/thayer-preece/"}],"publication":"Law Journal Newsletters","kicker":"Features","kickerNode":[{"name":"Features","slug":"features-kicker","uri":"/features/","sectionName":"Features"}],"prettyDate":"July 28, 2011","pubDate":"2011-07-28 15:21:00:000","modifiedDate":"","isDownload":"false","primaryCategory":{"channelName":"","sectionName":"","name":"","uri":"","slug":"","channelUri":""},"tags":[],"image":{"uri":"","width":"","height":""},"embed1":"","embed2":"","summary":"Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and his teammates recently mowed down California's ban on violent video games with fully loaded First Amendment precedents and barbed retorts to opposing arguments. In doing so, the U.S. Supreme Court reinforced a fundamental point: First Amendment protections do not depend on the medium of communication. Thus, video games are protected speech, and restrictions based on their content will be subject to strict scrutiny.","categories":[{"name":"Kicker","uri":"///","channelName":"Kicker"},{"name":"Features","uri":"/features/","channelName":"Kicker"},{"name":"Topics","uri":"///","channelName":"Topics"},{"name":"Commercial Law","uri":"/commercial-law/","channelName":"Topics"},{"name":"Litigation","uri":"/litigation/","channelName":"Topics"},{"name":"Technology Media and Telecom","uri":"/topics/technology-media-and-telecom/","channelName":"Industry"},{"name":"Sections","uri":"/sections/","channelName":"Sections"},{"name":"News","uri":"/sections/news/","channelName":"Sections"},{"name":"LJN Newsletters","uri":"/ljn-newsletters/","channelName":"LJN Newsletters"},{"name":"Entertainment Law & Finance","uri":"/ljn-newsletters/entertainment-law-and-finance/","channelName":"LJN Newsletters"}],"bodyArray":["

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and his teammates recently mowed down California's ban on violent video games with fully loaded First Amendment precedents and barbed retorts to opposing arguments. In doing so, the U.S. Supreme Court reinforced a fundamental point: First Amendment protections do not depend on the medium of communication. Thus, video games are protected speech, and restrictions based on their content will be subject to strict scrutiny. Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association, 08-1448 (2011).

","

The California law at issue (Cal. Civ. Code Ann. ”1746-1746.5) prohibited the sale or rental of violent video games to minors and imposed a civil penalty of $1,000 for every violation. At the heart of the law was a definition of the restricted games as those “in which the range of options available to a player includes killing, maiming, dismembering, or sexually assaulting an image of a human being, if those acts are depicted” in a manner that “[a] reasonable person, considering the game as a whole, would find appeals to a deviant or morbid interest of minors,” that is “patently offensive to prevailing standards in the community as to what is suitable for minors” and that “causes the game, as a whole, to lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors.”

","

The statutory definition cobbled together tests adopted in two prior U.S. Supreme Court decisions: one adopting a restriction on obscene materials specific to minors (Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U.S. 629 (1968)); the other a notoriously vague decision governing obscenity generally and permitting the standard for restrictions on obscene material to be based on “community standards” (Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15, 24 (1973)). However, the California statute sought to apply the tests to depictions of violence, rather than depictions of nudity or sexually explicit conduct.

","

Split Decision

","

The Supreme Court struck down the law in a split decision that created some unusual alignments. Scalia was joined by Justice Anthony Kennedy, now considered a centrist, and the court's three female justices ' Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan ' all considered part of the liberal wing. Justice Samuel Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts concurred in the judgment, but would have avoided the central issue of whether the law's restrictions unduly restricted protected speech by finding it to be impermissibly vague. Justice Clarence Thomas dissented, applying an “original intent” analysis that would have held, in essence, that minors have no right to receive any information at all other than what their parents want them to have.

","

Finally, and perhaps most strangely, Justice Stephen Breyer dissented, arguing that the statute met strict scrutiny analysis, primarily because interactive video games involve physical activity as well as communication.

","

The court majority acknowledged that the government may adopt limits on materials available to minors that are more restrictive than the limits that may constitutionally be applied to adults. However, it held that in doing so the government is limited to areas that traditionally have been the subject of restrictions on speech, such as obscenity. Relying on its recent decision in United States v. Stevens, 130 S.Ct. 1577 (2010), which struck down a statute prohibiting violent “crush” videos, the court held that “new categories of unprotected speech may not be added to the list by a legislature that concludes certain speech is too harmful to be tolerated.”

","

No Different Than Other Entertainment

","

The majority fired back at the argument, asserted in different ways both by Alito and Breyer, that interactive video games are ' or at least might be ' different than other forms of entertainment: “[W]hatever the challenges of applying the Constitution to ever-advancing technology, the basic principles of freedom of speech and the press, like the First Amendment's command, do not vary, when a new and different medium for communication appears.”

","

The decision also shot down Thomas' proposition (notably joined by no other justice) that, in essence, parents have “total parental control over children's lives,” and that children are “expected to be dutiful and obedient.” Instead, the majority held that ”minors are entitled to a significant measure of First Amendment protection, and only in relatively narrow and well-defined circumstances may government bar public dissemination of protected materials to them.”

","

Thus, the Supreme Court majority held that the California law was subject to “strict scrutiny” ' the most demanding test imposed by constitutional law for the validity of restrictions on fundamental rights, like speech. When faced with that test, the law was even less likely to survive than a pedestrian in the Grand Theft Auto videogame.

","

First, the court majority found that the California government “acknowledges that it cannot show a direct causal link between violent video games and harm to minors.” In particular, it noted that the expert upon whom the government primarily relied had conceded that, to the extent exposure to violent video games had any meaningful effects, “the same effects have been found when children watch cartoons starring Bugs Bunny or the Road Runner ' or when they play video games like Sonic the Hedgehog '.”

","

Second, the majority found that the law was substantially underinclusive, singling out video game providers and not addressing others, such as “booksellers, cartoonists, and movie producers.” This called into question whether the law would effectively further the purported interest of protecting minors from the effects of exposure to violent entertainment.

","

Finally, the majority concluded that the California law provided only marginal benefits beyond those provided by existing, voluntary industry regulations, while at the same time restricting purchases by minors who have their parents' consent to acquire restricted games.

","

Concurrence and Dissent

","

The concurring and dissenting justices fired off in three different decisions. Alito's concurrence adopted a limited approach that may have been intended to provide common ground for the warring factions of the court. It would have tossed out the California law on the grounds that it was impermissibly vague, putting off for another day the question of whether there is something unique about video games that might justify restrictions that would otherwise be unconstitutional under the First Amendment. If Alito's intent was to provide a pragmatic solution that would satisfy most or all of his colleagues, he failed. Only Roberts joined his concurring opinion.

","

Thomas dissented, arguing that the First Amendment has to be construed in light of the cultural values in place at the time it was adopted. Relying principally on “[t]wo parenting books published in the 1830s,” but also citing from works by Locke and Rousseau and the letters of Thomas Jefferson, Thomas claimed that it was the cultural norm at the time of the adoption of the First Amendment that “[p]arents had total authority over what their children read,” as well as the right to control other aspects of their children's lives, and hence that “the Framers could not possibly have understood 'the freedom of speech' to include an unqualified right to speak to minors.” Thus, Thomas would have rejected any First Amendment protection for minors to have access to information of any kind. Responding, the court majority pointed out that even if it is true that parents have traditionally had the power to control what their children hear and say, “it does not follow that the state has the power to prevent children from hearing or saying anything without their parents' prior consent.”

","

As a practical matter, the proposition that parents have the power to control what their children hear or say would come as a surprise to most parents. Regardless, the majority decision points out that even if they do, that does not mean that the government has the power to compel them to exercise that authority, or the power to prevent their children from hearing or saying anything they have not approved.

","

Breyer's dissent asserted that video games are different because they constitute “an interactive, virtual form of target practice,” and while the evidence is not conclusive, there is research supporting the proposition that the effects of video games on violent or aggressive tendencies in minors “may be” more significant and severe than other forms of communication or entertainment. Under these circumstances, Breyer argued, courts should defer to the judgment of the legislature. Thus, Breyer concluded, the California law should have been found to survive strict scrutiny.

","

End of Self-Regulation Unlikely

","

It remains to be seen how the consequences of the court's decision will play out. Contrary to the concern expressed by Alito, however, it's highly unlikely that the recognition of First Amendment protection for violent video games will spell an end to industry self-regulation, particularly because the California statute was struck down in part based on the recognition of the efficacy of the self-regulatory scheme. Therefore, expect industry self-regulation to march on while state and federal statutes fall by the wayside. In any event, California has used its law's last life, and at least for now, it's game over.

","

James Chadwick is a partner in the entertainment, media and technology, business trial and intellectual property practice groups in Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton's San Francisco and Palo Alto offices. Thayer Preece is an associate in the intellectual property practice group in the firm's Palo Alto office. Chadwick and Preece are also members of Sheppard, Mullin's video game industry practice.

","

The statutory definition cobbled together tests adopted in two prior U.S. Supreme Court decisions: one adopting a restriction on obscene materials specific to minors ( Ginsberg v. New York , 390 U.S. 629 (1968)); the other a notoriously vague decision governing obscenity generally and permitting the standard for restrictions on obscene material to be based on “community standards” ( Miller v. California , 413 U.S. 15, 24 (1973)). However, the California statute sought to apply the tests to depictions of violence, rather than depictions of nudity or sexually explicit conduct.

","

Split Decision

","

The court majority acknowledged that the government may adopt limits on materials available to minors that are more restrictive than the limits that may constitutionally be applied to adults. However, it held that in doing so the government is limited to areas that traditionally have been the subject of restrictions on speech, such as obscenity. Relying on its recent decision in United States v. Stevens , 130 S.Ct. 1577 (2010), which struck down a statute prohibiting violent “crush” videos, the court held that “new categories of unprotected speech may not be added to the list by a legislature that concludes certain speech is too harmful to be tolerated.”

","

No Different Than Other Entertainment

","

Concurrence and Dissent

","

End of Self-Regulation Unlikely

","

"],"altLangHeadline":"","altLangBodyArray":[],"slides":[]},"youmightlike":[{"uri":"/2024/11/01/commercial-property-insurance-how-much-coverage-do-you-really-have/","title":"Commercial Property Insurance: How Much Coverage Do You Really Have?","byline":"Chris Kuleba, Harrell Watts II and Evan Knott","authors":[{"name":"Chris Kuleba, Harrell Watts II","description":"","imageLarge":"https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/f16d6fc2845f417ea0e93a3f2b6cd37d?s=136&d=mm&r=g","webUrl":"/author/profile/chris-kuleba-harrell-watts-ii/","jobTitle":""},{"name":"Evan Knott","description":"","imageLarge":"https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/f16d6fc2845f417ea0e93a3f2b6cd37d?s=136&d=mm&r=g","webUrl":"/author/profile/evan-knott/","jobTitle":""}],"prettyDate":"November 01, 2024","readtime":"10","image":{"uri":"https://images.lawjournalnewsletters.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/382/2020/06/insurance6.jpg","width":"616","height":"372"},"summary":"While in many cases involving a substantial property loss the applicable insurance policy limit is clear, in some cases it is not, and the amount to which the policyholder is entitled is governed by a confluence of policy provisions informed by applicable state law."},{"uri":"/2024/11/01/law-firm-real-estate-attorney-offices-are-out-conference-rooms-are-in/","title":"Law Firm Real Estate: Attorney Offices Are Out, Conference Rooms Are In","byline":"Alaa Pasha","authors":[{"name":"Alaa Pasha","description":"","imageLarge":"https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/f16d6fc2845f417ea0e93a3f2b6cd37d?s=136&d=mm&r=g","webUrl":"/author/profile/alaa-pasha/","jobTitle":""}],"prettyDate":"November 01, 2024","readtime":"5","image":{"uri":"https://images.lawjournalnewsletters.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/382/2024/10/conference_table.jpg","width":"695","height":"505"},"summary":"Law firms are navigating a paradigm shift in how they approach office space. With the rise of flexible workplaces, firms are finding that when their attorneys do come into the office, the main goal is to connect and collaborate with peers — and this shift has transformed how law firms address their real estate needs."},{"uri":"/2024/11/01/unlocking-your-lawyers-rainmaking-potential/","title":"Unlocking Your Lawyers' Rainmaking Potential","byline":"Yuliya LaRoe","authors":[{"name":"Yuliya LaRoe","description":"","imageLarge":"https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/f16d6fc2845f417ea0e93a3f2b6cd37d?s=136&d=mm&r=g","webUrl":"/author/profile/yuliya-laroe/","jobTitle":""}],"prettyDate":"November 01, 2024","readtime":"6","image":{"uri":"https://images.lawjournalnewsletters.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/382/2022/07/money_rain.jpg","width":"616","height":"372"},"summary":"With law firms continuing to face heightened market and industry pressures, business development is essential for both law firm growth and individual lawyer success. However, coaching lawyers to become effective rainmakers presents unique challenges."},{"uri":"/2024/11/01/the-power-of-your-inner-circle-turning-friends-and-social-contacts-into-business-allies/","title":"The Power of Your Inner Circle: Turning Friends and Social Contacts Into Business Allies","byline":"Yuliya LaRoe","authors":[{"name":"Yuliya LaRoe","description":"","imageLarge":"https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/f16d6fc2845f417ea0e93a3f2b6cd37d?s=136&d=mm&r=g","webUrl":"/author/profile/yuliya-laroe/","jobTitle":""}],"prettyDate":"November 01, 2024","readtime":"9","image":{"uri":"https://images.lawjournalnewsletters.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/382/2024/10/friends.jpg","width":"620","height":"372"},"summary":"Practical strategies to explore doing business with friends and social contacts in a way that respects relationships and maximizes opportunities."},{"uri":"/2024/11/01/the-state-of-cost-recovery-post-covid/","title":"The State of Cost Recovery — Post COVID","byline":"Rob Mattern","authors":[{"name":"Rob Mattern","description":"","imageLarge":"https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/f16d6fc2845f417ea0e93a3f2b6cd37d?s=136&d=mm&r=g","webUrl":"/author/profile/rob-mattern/","jobTitle":""}],"prettyDate":"November 01, 2024","readtime":"7","image":{"uri":"https://images.lawjournalnewsletters.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/382/2023/01/hybrid_work2.jpg","width":"620","height":"372"},"summary":"Law firm operations are different now. Obviously, the biggest impact of COVID has been the inception and continuation of the hybrid work environment. This has been a kick in the pants for law firms to migrate to a digital working environment"},{"uri":"/2024/11/01/how-can-lawyers-get-client-referrals/","title":"How Can Lawyers Get Client Referrals?","byline":"Bryce Sanders","authors":[{"name":"Bryce Sanders","description":"Bryce Sanders, president of Perceptive Business Solutions Inc., has provided training for the financial services industry on high-net-worth client acquisition since 2001.\r\n\r\nHe trains financial professionals on how to identify prospects within the wealthiest 2%-5% of their market, where to meet and socialize with them, how to talk with wealthy people and develop personal relationships, and how to transform wealthy friends into clients.\r\n\r\nBryce spent 14 years with a major financial services firm as a successful financial advisor, two years as a district sales manager and four years as a home office manager.\r\n\r\nHe developed personal relationships within the HNW community through his past involvement as a Trustee of the James A. Michener Art Museum, Board of Associates for the Bucks County Chapter of the Fox Chase Cancer Center, Board of Trustees for Stevens Institute of Technology and as a church lector.\r\n\r\nBryce has been published in American City Business Journals, Barrons, InsuranceNewsNet, BenefitsPro, The Register, MDRT Round the Table, MDRT Blog, accountingweb.com, Advisorpedia and Horsesmouth.com. In Canada, his articles have appeared in Wealth Professional. He is the author of the book “Captivating the Wealthy Investor.”","imageLarge":"https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/da8e3db5d322bbb454034067b9a2c542?s=136&d=mm&r=g","webUrl":"/author/profile/bryce-sanders/","jobTitle":""}],"prettyDate":"November 01, 2024","readtime":"4","image":{"uri":"https://images.lawjournalnewsletters.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/382/2023/11/client6.jpg","width":"620","height":"372"},"summary":"Getting new business doesn't always involve knocking on doors. It can often be gained by whispering in the right ears."}],"readnext":{"contents":[{"uri":"/2022/01/01/covid-19-and-lease-negotiations-early-termination-provisions/","title":"COVID-19 and Lease Negotiations: Early Termination Provisions","prettyDate":"January 01, 2022","summary":"During the COVID-19 pandemic, some tenants were able to negotiate termination agreements with their landlords. But even though a landlord may agree to terminate a lease to regain control of a defaulting tenant's space without costly and lengthy litigation, typically a defaulting tenant that otherwise has no contractual right to terminate its lease will be in a much weaker bargaining position with respect to the conditions for termination.","description":"During the COVID-19 pandemic, some tenants were able to negotiate termination agreements with their landlords. But even though a landlord may agree to terminate a lease to regain control of a defaulting tenant's space without costly and lengthy litigation, typically a defaulting tenant that otherwise has no contractual right to terminate its lease will be in a much weaker bargaining position with respect to the conditions for termination.","kicker":"Features","image":{"uri":"https://images.lawjournalnewsletters.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/382/2017/12/contract.jpg","width":"616","height":"372"},"primaryCategory":{"name":"","uri":"","channelName":"","channelUri":""},"publication":"Law Journal Newsletters"},{"uri":"/2024/11/01/how-secure-is-the-ai-system-your-law-firm-is-using/","title":"How Secure Is the AI System Your Law Firm Is Using?","prettyDate":"November 01, 2024","summary":"What Law Firms Need to Know Before Trusting AI Systems with Confidential Information\nIn a profession where confidentiality is paramount, failing to address AI security concerns could have disastrous consequences. It is vital that law firms and those in related industries ask the right questions about AI security to protect their clients and their reputation.","description":"What Law Firms Need to Know Before Trusting AI Systems with Confidential Information\nIn a profession where confidentiality is paramount, failing to address AI security concerns could have disastrous consequences. It is vital that law firms and those in related industries ask the right questions about AI security to protect their clients and their reputation.","kicker":"Features","image":{"uri":"https://images.lawjournalnewsletters.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/382/2024/05/artificial_intelligence9.jpg","width":"620","height":"372"},"primaryCategory":{"name":"","uri":"","channelName":"","channelUri":""},"publication":"Law Journal Newsletters"},{"uri":"/2024/10/01/generative-ai-and-the-2024-elections-risks-realities-and-lessons-for-businesses/","title":"Generative AI and the 2024 Elections: Risks, Realities, and Lessons for Businesses","prettyDate":"October 01, 2024","summary":"GenAI's ability to produce highly sophisticated and convincing content at a fraction of the previous cost has raised fears that it could amplify misinformation. The dissemination of fake audio, images and text could reshape how voters perceive candidates and parties. Businesses, too, face challenges in managing their reputations and navigating this new terrain of manipulated content.","description":"GenAI's ability to produce highly sophisticated and convincing content at a fraction of the previous cost has raised fears that it could amplify misinformation. The dissemination of fake audio, images and text could reshape how voters perceive candidates and parties. Businesses, too, face challenges in managing their reputations and navigating this new terrain of manipulated content.","kicker":"Features","image":{"uri":"https://images.lawjournalnewsletters.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/382/2024/09/harris_trump_767.jpg","width":"767","height":"633"},"primaryCategory":{"name":"","uri":"","channelName":"","channelUri":""},"publication":"Law Journal Newsletters"},{"uri":"/2024/11/01/authentic-communications-today-increase-success-for-value-driven-clients/","title":"Authentic Communications Today Increase Success for Value-Driven Clients","prettyDate":"November 01, 2024","summary":"As the relationship between in-house and outside counsel continues to evolve, lawyers must continue to foster a client-first mindset, offer business-focused solutions, and embrace technology that helps deliver work faster and more efficiently.","description":"As the relationship between in-house and outside counsel continues to evolve, lawyers must continue to foster a client-first mindset, offer business-focused solutions, and embrace technology that helps deliver work faster and more efficiently.","kicker":"Features","image":{"uri":"https://images.lawjournalnewsletters.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/382/2023/05/collaboration3.jpg","width":"620","height":"372"},"primaryCategory":{"name":"","uri":"","channelName":"","channelUri":""},"publication":"Law Journal Newsletters"},{"uri":"/2024/11/01/pleading-importation-itc-decisions-highlight-need-for-adequate-evidentiary-support/","title":"Pleading Importation: ITC Decisions Highlight Need for Adequate Evidentiary Support","prettyDate":"November 01, 2024","summary":"The International Trade Commission is empowered to block the importation into the United States of products that infringe U.S. intellectual property rights, In the past, the ITC generally instituted investigations without questioning the importation allegations in the complaint, however in several recent cases, the ITC declined to institute an investigation as to certain proposed respondents due to inadequate pleading of importation.","description":"The International Trade Commission is empowered to block the importation into the United States of products that infringe U.S. intellectual property rights, In the past, the ITC generally instituted investigations without questioning the importation allegations in the complaint, however in several recent cases, the ITC declined to institute an investigation as to certain proposed respondents due to inadequate pleading of importation.","kicker":"Features","image":{"uri":"https://images.lawjournalnewsletters.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/382/2020/11/itc.jpg","width":"620","height":"372"},"primaryCategory":{"name":"","uri":"","channelName":"","channelUri":""},"publication":"Law Journal Newsletters"},null]}},"extensions":{"DateTime":"2024-11-07T08:36:52.227484323","ResponseTime":"?","AuthorizedUser":false,"AlmContext":"AlmContext{clientIP='10.0.253.239', internalIP='true', origin='', authorizedUser='false', Chinchilla, userAccount='null', UCID=null, ipAccount='null'}","NavServiceResponse":{"message":"Show a wall","action":"show wall","data":"PayWallExcludedClient","placResultsPublic":{"overallContentType":"ExcludedContent","userState":"DENYNOSUB","showWall":"PayWallExcludedClient","userAccess":"0","referrer":"http://www.lawjournalnewsletters.com/2011/07/28/analysis-of-decision-by-supreme-court-on-video-games/","userAccessCookie":null,"productList":"","contentMetaData":"

ARTICLE/2011/07/28/analysis-of-decision-by-supreme-court-on-video-games/Law Journal Newsletters2011-07-28 15:21:00

Law Journal Newsletters

Kicker

Features

Topics

Commercial Law

Litigation

Technology Media and Telecom

Sections

News

LJN Newsletters

Entertainment Law & Finance

http://www.lawjournalnewsletters.com/2011/07/28/analysis-of-decision-by-supreme-court-on-video-games/

","numberOfViewsLeft":0,"numberOfFCFViewsLeft":0,"decisionEngine":"RidgeRunner","rulesFiredString":"[]","contentProductCodes":"[\"ljnef\",\"//ljnef\"]"}},"DebuggingData":null,"UsedCache":"true","DataUrl":"http://ml.alm.com:9016/bff-services/content/get-you-may-like-for-content.xqy?naturalId=/2011/07/28/analysis-of-decision-by-supreme-court-on-video-games/&site=www.lawjournalnewsletters.com&total="},"status":200,"headers":{}},"request":{"query":"query LawJournalNewsletterscom__Article{articleData:\n getContent(naturalId: \"/2011/07/28/analysis-of-decision-by-supreme-court-on-video-games/\", site:\"lawjournalnewsletters.com\") {\n uri\n canonicalUrl\n generatedId\n naturalId\n type\n postFormat\n kickerPresentedBy {\n \t\t label\n \t\t value\n \t\t}\n presentedBy\n title\n readtime\n timeToRead\n prettyModified\n prettyDateTime\n needToKnow\n byline\n authors {\n name\n description\n imageLarge\n webUrl\n }\n publication\n kicker\n kickerNode {\n name\n slug\n uri\n sectionName\n }\n prettyDate\n prettyDateTime\n pubDate\n modifiedDate\n isDownload\n primaryCategory {\n channelName\n sectionName\n name\n uri\n slug\n channelUri\n }\n tags\n image {\n uri\n width\n height\n }\n embed1\n embed2\n summary\n categories {\n name\n uri\n channelName\n }\n bodyArray\n altLangHeadline\n altLangBodyArray\n slides {\n image\n caption\n height\n width\n }\n\n\n }\n youmightlike:\n getYouMayLikeForContent(naturalId: \"/2011/07/28/analysis-of-decision-by-supreme-court-on-video-games/\", site:\"lawjournalnewsletters.com\") {\n uri\n title\n byline\n authors {\n name\n description\n imageLarge\n webUrl\n jobTitle\n }\n prettyDate\n readtime\n image {\n uri\n width\n height\n }\n summary\n }\n readnext:\n getStatsList(site:\"lawjournalnewsletters.com\", topic: \"\", limit: 5, timeframe: \"30days\" ) {\n contents {\n uri\n title\n prettyDate\n summary\n description\n kicker\n image {\n uri\n width\n height\n }\n primaryCategory {\n name\n uri\n channelName\n channelUri\n }\n publication\n }\n\n }\n }"}}

Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%