PHOENIX, AZ —There are times when the word “responsibility” seems to have become an obscenity never to be uttered or even considered. Such appears to be especially the case when dealing with matters of violent crime and who shall be held accountable. Throw in pornography, and the root of all criminal evil has conveniently been discovered – or so yet another doomed house bill claimed.Supporters of HB2660, which failed to survive the Senate Judiciary Committee by a vote of 4-2, was called a way to hold crime profiteers accountable by some – and an affront to the First Amendment by others.
The crux of the dispute is whether the creators of content that inspire others to commit felonies or acts of terrorism should be liable.
HB2660 sought to allow victims of to claim damage from creators and distributors of written or motion works in what could be deemed as a “sue them all and let the courts sort it out” fashion.
Bill sponsor Rep. Warde Nichols (R-Gilbert) defended the approach by insisting that the “victim should have the right to hold them civilly liable,” and expect the courts to figure out the legal liability details. “But make no mistake,” he vowed, “I am going to err on the side of protecting the victims of these heinous crimes.”
Nichols’ bill would have kept courts hopping as they determined the legal liability details associated with publishers, cable companies, and movie producers whose work is claimed to have inspired, motivated, or in some way caused violent criminal behavior by profiting from materials that are dangerous or obscene.
Supporters claimed that the bill would punish those who create and benefit financially from materials that urge or educate others on ways to engage in obscene acts or engage in violent behavior. Instructional materials such as “how-to videos on rape,” were specifically mentioned.
Most committee members reviewing the bill was unconvinced that it would not meet First Amendment protection requirements and could cause unintended harm, including the potential for mainstream writers such as Tom Clancy to be held accountable for the actions of others.
Currently, defendants in lawsuits in such cases can only be held responsible for damages in proportion to their actual involvement in the crime.
