[JumpCrisscross]

> not good that these bills are setting the expectation that speech can be compelled

How is this different from any disclosure, signage or notice requirement?

[iamnothere]

So you are fine with the government mandating that authors include certain things in their creative works?

Why not require all books to begin with the sentence “America is the greatest nation in the world”? Or requiring endorsement of a particular political party or politician? Or requiring a “stolen land” acknowledgement?

Edit to respond to dead comment: MPAA and ESRB ratings are voluntary. Ever heard of “unrated” films?

[JumpCrisscross]

> So you are fine with the government mandating that authors include certain things in their creative works?

No. This is a non sequitur.

> MPAA and ESRB ratings are voluntary

Okay? Cigarette-package notices are not. All manner of required disclosure packets are not.

[iamnothere]

Operating systems are not cigarettes or storefronts.

Maybe you’ve never written code, but done properly it’s certainly a creative act.

In the US we don’t allow laws that regulate the creative output of authors, filmmakers, painters, sculptors, or other such artisans. (That is, outside of “obscenity” laws that are constantly shrinking in scope as courts rightly reject most cases.)

Perhaps there is a difference when it comes to operating systems that provide built in “stores” with a monetary exchange function. This could be like building a moving sculpture that’s also a vending machine. The vending machine portion might be regulated under commercial laws depending on the level of craftsmanship and the mood of the court. A mass-produced sculptural vending machine is almost certainly subject to standard regulation even if it looks nice. A bespoke college art project may or may not be (although in any case the artist needs to pay their taxes). The law regarding creative projects is fuzzy and complicated.