View source for Entertainment Software Ass'n v. Foti

{{Use mdy dates|date=September 2023}}
{{short description|2006 American legal case}}
{{Infobox United States District Court case
| name = Entertainment Software Association v. Foti
| court = [[United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana]]
| image = 
| date decided = 
| full name = Entertainment Software Association et al. v. Charles C. Foti, Jr. et al.
| citations = 
| judge = [[James Brady (judge)|James J. Brady]]
| prior actions = 
| subsequent actions = 
| opinions = 
}}
'''''Entertainment Software Association v. Foti'''''<ref>{{cite web |url=https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/louisiana/lamdce/3:2006cv00431/33659/1/0.pdf?ts=1208834325 |title=The complaint: Entertainment Software Association vs. Foti |website=Justia.com |access-date=October 13, 2016}}</ref> is a [[lawsuit]] filed on June 16, 2006 claiming that a [[Louisiana]] law should be declared unconstitutional. The recently passed Louisiana law was a way for the state to [[Video game controversy|censor video games]] by making it illegal to supply minors with video games considered violent, similar to laws making pornographic material unavailable to minors, but using violence as the criteria instead of sexual content. The lawsuit claims that the law infringed on the video game industry's constitutional right to freedom of expression.

The suit was successful in getting the law overturned in late 2006, and the plaintiffs were awarded attorney's fees in early 2007.

==Lawsuit ==
The [[plaintiff]]s in the case, the [[Entertainment Software Association]] (ESA) and the [[Entertainment Merchants Association]] (EMA), claimed that Louisiana criminal law RS 14:91.14 <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/lss.asp?doc=78708|title=Louisiana Statute: La RS 14:91.14 Prohibited sales of video or computer games to minors}}</ref> is unconstitutional on [[First Amendment to the United States Constitution|First]] and [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourteenth Amendment]] grounds. The defendants were [[Attorney General]] of Louisiana, [[Charles Foti|Charles C. Foti, Jr.]], and Doug Moreau, US [[District Attorney]] of the [[Parish]] of East [[Baton Rouge]]. Louisiana Governor [[Kathleen Blanco]] had signed [[Louisiana House Bill 1381|HB1381]] just the day before as Act 441 of the 2006 Louisiana Regular Session. The law made it illegal for someone in Louisiana to sell, lease or rent a violent video game (as defined in the Act) to someone under 18 years of age.

The suit pointed out that in other states, similar laws had already been declared unconstitutional, and thus impossible to enforce. Furthermore, according to the suit, the law would have chilling results with video games being less likely to be accessible by adults (as well as by minors, as was the initial intent of the law).

==Aftermath==
Louisiana Middle District Judge James J. Brady issued a [[preliminary injunction]] on August 24, 2006.<ref name="GP injunction">{{cite web|url=http://gamepolitics.livejournal.com/347139.html |title=Judge Issues Preliminary Injunction Against Louisiana Law |access-date=2007-01-20 |last=McCauley |first=Dennis |author-link=Dennis McCauley |date=2006-08-25 |publisher=[[GamePolitics.com]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070212163016/http://gamepolitics.livejournal.com/347139.html |archive-date=2007-02-12 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

On July 17, 2006, Florida attorney and activist, [[Jack Thompson (attorney)|Jack Thompson]], who helped Louisiana Representative [[Roy Burrell]] author HB1381, filed an [[amicus curiae]] brief<ref>{{cite web |url=https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/louisiana/lamdce/3:2006cv00431/33659/26/0.pdf?ts=1208833664 |title=John B. (Jack) Thompson's Motion for Leave to File ''Amicus Curiae'' Brief |website=Justia.com |access-date=October 13, 2016}}</ref> which Judge Brady denied<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.gamepolitics.com/images/legal/LA-JT-denied.pdf |title=Judge Brady DENIES Thompson's Motion for Leave to File ''Amicus Curiae'' Brief |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110711072145/http://www.gamepolitics.com/images/legal/LA-JT-denied.pdf |archive-date=July 11, 2011 |access-date=October 13, 2016 |url-status=dead}}</ref> on July 19, 2006.

The law was [[permanent injunction|permanently enjoined]]<ref>{{cite web |url=https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/louisiana/lamdce/3:2006cv00431/33659/52/0.pdf?ts=1208830269 |title=Court GRANTS permanent injunction prohibiting enforcement of La. R.S. 14:91.14 |website=Justia.com |access-date=October 13, 2016}}</ref> on November 29, 2006, and the court entered final judgment on December 5, 2006.

In his April 10, 2007 ruling,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.gamepolitics.com/images/legal/LA-judge-on-fees.pdf |title=Judge Brady awards $92,000 to pay the plaintiffs' attorney's fees |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110711071922/http://www.gamepolitics.com/images/legal/LA-judge-on-fees.pdf |archive-date=July 11, 2011 |access-date=October 13, 2016 |url-status=dead}}</ref> Judge Brady stated that he was dumbfounded that the law even passed and was signed into law, given that similar laws were struck down in other states and those same states were forced to pay the legal fees of the plaintiffs. Judge Brady ordered the state to pay $92,000 in legal fees to the plaintiffs, ESA and EMA.<ref name="GP Judge Dumfounded">{{cite web |url=http://gamepolitics.com/2007/04/16/federal-judge-dumbfounded-by-jack-thompsons-failed-louisiana-game-law/ |title=Judge Trashes Louisiana Govt. Over Failed Jack Thompson Law, Orders State to Pay Legal Fees |last=McCauley |first=Dennis |author-link=Dennis McCauley |date=2007-04-16 |publisher=[[GamePolitics.com]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160628012606/http://gamepolitics.com/2007/04/16/federal-judge-dumbfounded-by-jack-thompsons-failed-louisiana-game-law/ |archive-date=June 28, 2016 |access-date=October 13, 2016 |url-status=dead}}</ref>

Representative Roy Burrell stated that he may pursue such legislation again in the future.<ref name="KATC">{{cite web |url=http://www.katc.com/Global/story.asp?S=6374154 |title=State has to pay legal fees over defunct video law |access-date=2007-04-16 |publisher=[[KATC (TV)|KATC]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070928065417/http://www.katc.com/Global/story.asp?S=6374154|archive-date=2007-09-28|url-status=dead }}</ref>

==References==
<references />

==External links==
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20070912125810/http://www.legis.state.la.us/billdata/byinst.asp?sessionid=06rs&billtype=SB&billno=340 HB1381 - 2006 Regular Session (Act 441)] at the Louisiana's Assembly website
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20070912125810/http://www.legis.state.la.us/billdata/byinst.asp?sessionid=06rs&billtype=SB&billno=340 SB340 - 2006 Regular Session (Act 529)] at the Louisiana's Assembly website
* [http://arquivo.pt/wayback/20091228173003/http://gamepolitics.livejournal.com/tag/hb1381 coverage of HB1381] on [[GamePolitics.com]]

{{Video game controversy}}

[[Category:Video game case law]]
[[Category:Louisiana law]]
[[Category:Video game censorship]]
[[Category:2006 in United States case law]]
[[Category:2006 in Louisiana]]
[[Category:Entertainment Software Association]]
[[Category:Video gaming in the United States]]
[[Category:2006 in video gaming]]
[[Category:United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana cases]]
[[Category:Jack Thompson (activist)]]