A trade group that represents software and video game publishers sued the Chicago Transit Authority on Wednesday, saying a rule barring ads on trains and buses for “mature” and “adults only” games violates the right to freedom of speech.
“The CTA’s ordinance constitutes a clear violation of the constitutional rights of the entertainment software industry,” said Michael D. Gallagher, chief executive officer of the Washington-based Entertainment Software Association.
The association maintains that computer and video games are entitled to the same free speech protection under the First Amendment as other forms of entertainment such as movies.
Kenneth L. Doroshow, general counsel of the association, pointed out that the movie “Resident Evil,” which is based on a video game, could be advertised on CTA buses and trains but the game itself could not under the rule, which was approved in November 2008.
CTA spokeswoman Wanda Taylor said the authority believes “that our ordinance is defensible.”
“CTA does not allow ads for alcohol or tobacco products and this ordinance is consistent with that longstanding policy,” she said.
The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court, alleges that the CTA’s rule unconstitutionally “restricts speech in a public forum that is otherwise open to all speakers without a compelling interest for doing so.” It asks the court to declare the rule void, to bar the CTA from enforcing it and to award the association court costs and legal fees.
Doroshow said association officials discussed the matter with CTA officials for some time and that the transit authority’s objection was that some games labeled “”mature” and “adults only” could inspire violence among those who play the games.
The association says the ads themselves are subject to the Entertainment Software Rating Board’s Advertising Review Council, which “strictly regulates computer and video game advertisements that are seen by the general public.”
Supreme Court Seems Likely To Uphold A Law That Could Force TikTok To Shut Down On Jan. 19
The Supreme Court on Friday seemed likely to uphold a law that would ban TikTok in the United States beginning Jan. 19 unless the popular social media program is sold by its China-based parent company.
Hearing arguments in a momentous clash of free speech and national security concerns, the justices seemed persuaded by arguments that the national security threat posed by the company's connections to China override concerns about restricting the speech either of TikTok or its 170 million users in the United States.
Early in arguments that lasted more than two and a half hours, Chief Justice John Roberts identified his main concern: TikTok's ownership by China-based ByteDance and the parent company's requirement to cooperate with the Chinese government's intelligence operations.
If left in place, the law passed by bipartisan majorities in Congress and signed by President Joe Biden in April will require TikTok to "go dark" on Jan. 19, lawyer Noel Francisco told the justices on behalf of TikTok.
At the very least, Francisco urged, the justices should enter a temporary pause that would allow TikTok to keep operating. "We might be in a different world again" after President-elect Donald Trump takes office on Jan. 20. Trump, who has 14.7 million followers on TikTok, also has called for the deadline to be pushed back to give him time to negotiate a "political resolution." Francisco served as Trump's solicitor general in his first presidential term.
But it was not clear whether any justices would choose such a course. And only Justice Neil Gorsuch sounded like he would side with TikTok to find that the ban violates the Constitution.
Gorsuch labeled arguments advanced by the Biden administration' in defense of the law a... Read More