The 2011 U.S. Supreme Court case Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association adjudicated the State of California’s right to regulate the sale of “violent” video games and, in the process, effectively considered how video games should be apprehended as a cultural form under the law. The court’s decision cited the missteps of judicial film censorship in protecting video games as a form of expression under the First Amendment, placing video games into a cultural time line of expressive forms. Some media scholars contest the court’s approach for overvaluing the cultural aspects of video games and neglecting their distinct digital materiality. However, a close reading of the case and the circumstances that led the justices’ opinions helps articulate a crucial critique of overly materialist approaches to video games associated with media archaeology. The case details reflect the inextricability of materiality and experience in considering video games as a form of expression.
BarthesR.BalzacH. D. (1974). S/Z(1st American ed.). New York, NY: Hill and Wang.
8.
BogostI. (2007). Persuasive games: The expressive power of videogames. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
9.
BolterJ. D.GrusinR. A. (1999). Remediation: Understanding new media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
10.
Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Ass’n, 131 S. Ct. 2729 (2011).
11.
CameronD.CarrollJ. (2011). Encoding liveness: Performance and real-time rendering in Machinima. In LowoodH.NitscheM. (Eds.), The Machinima reader (pp. 127–142). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12.
CarrollN. (1985). The specificity of media in the arts. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 19, 5–20.
13.
CarrollN. (1996). Theorizing the moving image. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
14.
DerridaJ. (1978). Structure, sign and play in the discourse of the human sciences. In BassA. (Ed. & Trans.), Writing and difference (pp. 278–293). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
15.
DerridaJ.RonellA. (1980). The law of genre. Critical Inquiry, 7, 55–81.
16.
ElsaesserT. (2016). Media archaeology as symptom. New Review of Film and Television Studies, 14, 181–215.
17.
ErnstW. (2012). Electronic mediations: Digital memory and the archive. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
18.
Freedman v. Maryland, No. 380 51(Supreme Court 1965).
GallowayA. R. (2006). Gaming essays on algorithmic culture. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
21.
GallowayA. R. (2012). The interface effect. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.
22.
HakimiJ. (2017). Designing auteurs: Video games, authorship, and MoMA. Écrans—Politique des auteurs/Auteur theory. Lectures contemporaines, 2, 207–225.
23.
HakimiJ. (2018). Press play: Video games and the ludic quality of aesthetic experiences across media. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.
24.
HuhtamoE.ParikkaJ. (2011). Media archaeology: Approaches, applications, and implications. Berkeley: University of California Press.
25.
JenkinsH. (2006). Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide. New York: New York University Press.
26.
JonesS. E. (2013). The emergence of the digital humanities. Abingdon, England: Routledge.
27.
JonesS. E. (2016). The emergence of the digital humanities (as the network is everting). In GoldM. K.KleinL. F. (Eds.), Debates in the digital humanities 2016 (pp. 3–15). Minneapolis: U of Minnesota Press.
28.
Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson, 343 S. Ct. 495 (1952).
KaganE. (2015). Associate Justice Elena Kagan Speaks with Dean Martha Minow. On Harvard Law Program. Harvard Law School YouTube page. Retrieved fromhttps://youtu.be/fWJkCDJMGH4
31.
Kingsley International Pictures v. Regents of the University of the State of New York 360 684 (Supreme Court 1958).
32.
KirschenbaumM. G. (2008). Mechanisms: New nedia and the forensic imagination. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
33.
KittlerF. (1997). There is no software. In JohnstonJ. (Ed.), Literature, media, information systems (pp. 147–155). Amsterdam: Overseas Publishers Association.
34.
LopesD. (2010). A philosophy of computer art. New York, NY: Routledge.
35.
ManovichL. (2001). The language of new media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
36.
Miller v. California, No. 413 15(Supreme Court 1973).
37.
MontfortN. (2003). Twisty little passages: An approach to interactive fiction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
38.
MontfortN. (2004). Continuous paper: The early materiality and workings of electronic literature. Philadelphia, PA: Modern Language Association. Retrieved August 25, 2015, fromhttp://nickm.com/writing/essays/continuous_paper_mla.html
39.
MontfortN.BogostI. (2009). Racing the beam: The Atari video computer system. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
40.
Mutual Film Corp. v. Industrial Comm’n of Ohio, 236 S. Ct. 230 (1915).
41.
NitscheM. (2011). Machinima as media. In LowoodH.NitscheM. (Eds.), The machinima reader (pp. 113–126). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
42.
ParikkaJ. (2012). Archives in media theory: Material media archaeology and digital humanities. In BerryD. M. (Ed.), Understanding digital humanities (pp. 85–104). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
43.
PetersenJ. (2014). Behind the screen: Visuality, law, and new media. Popular Communication, 12, 166–177.
44.
PetersenJ. (2015). Is code speech? Law and the expressivity of machine language. New Media & Society, 17, 415–431.
45.
PrestonD. (2014). Some ontology of interactive art. Philosophy & Technology, 27, 267–278.
46.
RossC. J. (2011, June28). A video victory for free speech. The Washington Post, p. A15.
47.
RyanM. L. (2015). Narrative as virtual reality 2: Revisiting immersion and interactivity in literature and electronic media. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
48.
SchieselS. (2011, June28). The court has ruled; Now games have a duty. The New York Times, p. 28.
49.
SmutsA. (2009). What is interactivity?Journal of Aesthetic Education, 43, 53–73.
50.
Superior Films, Inc. v. Department of Ed. Of Ohio, 346 S. Ct. 587 (1954).
51.
TaylorT. L. (2018). Watch me play: Twitch and the rise of game live streaming. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
52.
VerstegenI. (2014). Dispositional realism and the specificity of digital media. Leonardo, 47, 159–163.
53.
Wittern-KellerL. (2008). Freedom of the screen: Legal challenges to State film censorship, 1915-1981. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky.
54.
WolfM. J. (2001). The medium of the video game. Austin: University of Texas Press.
