Get the Desktop App for Battle.net Now
- All your games in 1 place
- Log in once
- Automatic game updates
So when is this case being heard? Because it does not appear on any docket list I have been able to find for the supreme court... Further while I agree that U.S. v. Morrision shows that congress can not regulate non-econmoic activity... Macro use is definitely going to be more hotly contested as an economic activity then the violation of the violence against women act in that case (although this act is important and does offer a civil remedy to those who are victims).
The activity being regulated here is playing online games. I would imagine that if D3 required a monthly fee, then a restriction on macro usage would be a completely valid regulation since you're actively engaged in ISC when playing.
But, since D3 requires no online fee, you may not really be in interstate commerce after you purchase and play. So, you'd probably have to go with the substantial effects test, and I just can't see how internet game playing would be considered to have a substantial effect after the holding in Lopez. The Court would scrutinize the !@#$ out of that finding and probably conclude that it required too many inferences to get from Zerging Mephisto to a substantial effect on ISC and reject the law as an invalid exercise of CC power.
Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.
Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.
Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.