Nintendo Releases Annual Piracy Report, Pleads to Think of the Children

In its annual report to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, Nintendo again outlined the state of piracy in the world in regard to its hardware and software products. Countries that have made the piracy list this year include China (”the hub of production of counterfeit goods”), Mexico (”anti-piracy actions are… wholly inadequate”), Spain (”the availability of game-copying devices is alarming”) and Paraguay (”corruption continues to hamper anti-piracy efforts”). In addition to these countries, Nintendo also complimented the Republic of Korea for recent raids made against pirates in conjunction with the US.

Interestingly enough, Nintendo decided to utilize the old adage of protecting the children as a reason to prevent piracy. Jodi Daugherty, senior director of anti-piracy writes,

It is important for parents to note that if users of circumvention devices are children, they may be exposed to unsuitable content downloaded from the Internet and played on their Nintendo systems.

So there you have it folks. It’s not about the money, it’s about the unlicensed porno Wii games that might make it to your children!

Popularity: 2% [?]

Xbox Live Continues TOS Inspired Bans on Sexual Orientation

While state legislatures continue to wage the battle against violent games, Microsoft is continuing it’s battle with “offensive” users proclaiming their sexual orientation. The Xbox Live service has always taken censorship seriously, but it encountered stark criticism last year when it began to ban gamertags containing allegedly sexual explicit terms that were actual surnames of individuals that subscribed to its service. Now it appears that Live is using the same justification to ban users that have publicly identified themselves as homosexual while playing the game.

The gamer, identified as Teresa, listed her sexual orientation on her profile, and says that she began to receive threats and ridicule from other gamers while playing online. After filing her own complaint to Microsoft over the harassment she received, Microsoft promptly banned her gamertag accusing her of violating its terms by listing her sexual orientation and expressing it while using its service.

The specific clause in the terms of use, located here, states that your gamertag can be terminated if you violate their “code of conduct” by doing one of the following: 

• Creat[ing] a Gamertag, avatar or use text in other profile fields that may offend other members.This includes comments that look, sound like, stand for, hint at, abbreviate, or insinuate or relate to any of the following: profane words/phrases, topics or content of a sexual nature, hate speech (including but not limited to racial, ethnic, or religious slurs), illegal drugs/controlled substances, or illegal activities;

Whether someone’s sexual orientation can offend another in such a manner that the user should be banned under this contract clause is an interesting question. However, considering the relative cutthroat nature of Xbox Live in general, coupled with the fact that Microsoft released a game last year that contained a lesbian love scene, you have to wonder just how double sided Microsoft’s position is on this issue.

Popularity: 5% [?]

Utah Advertising Bill Approved By Committee, To Be Voted On By Utah House

After viewing a montage of sexually risque footage from Grand Theft Auto IV, 10 out of 13 House committee members approved HB 353 for consideration by all 75 members of the House. Read the rest of this entry »

Popularity: 7% [?]

Online Gamers Prefer Friends to Strangers, Shocking Study

The National Science Foundation and the Army Research Institute, using data provided by Sony Online, recently announced (via MSNBC) the results of a study of 7,000 Everquest II players. The study came to the shocking conclusion that  “… the Internet — and online games — are used mostly as a way to stay in touch with friends and family.”

Amazing, I know. But what was this survey actually doing?

Read the rest of this entry »

Popularity: unranked [?]

Press Release on VSDA v. Schwarzenegger

The ESA and EMA have released the following joint press release on the recent Ninth Circuit Decision (please also see our own coverage of the decision).

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

February 20, 2009

CONTACTS:             Dan Hewitt, 202.223.2400, dhewitt@theESA.com
Sean Bersell, 818.728,8663, sbersell@entmerch.org

Video Game Publishers and Retailers Respond to Court Ruling Overturning California Video Game Restriction Law

U.S. Ninth Circuit Sides with Groups in Challenge to 2005 Law

ENCINO, CA and WASHINGTON, DC – February 20, 2009 – Following are statements of Bo Andersen, President and CEO of the Entertainment Merchants Association (EMA) and Michael D. Gallagher, President and CEO of the Entertainment Software Association (ESA), in response to today’s ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals in the case of Video Software Dealers Association v. Schwarzenegger (#07-16620), which held a 2005 video game restriction law enacted by the state of California to be an unconstitutional violation of the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech.

Statement of Bo Andersen: “We are extremely gratified by the court’s rejection of video game censorship by the state of California. The ruling vindicates what we have said since the bill that became this law was introduced: ratings education, retailer ratings enforcement, and control of game play by parents are the appropriate responses to concerns about video game content.

“Retailers are committed to assisting parents in assuring that children do not purchase games that are not appropriate for their age. Independent surveys show that retailers are doing a very good job in this area, with an 80% enforcement rate, and retailers will continue to work to increase enforcement rates even further. The court has correctly noted that the state cannot simply dismiss these efforts.

“I understand that some government officials will push for the state to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review this decision. The state should not acquiesce in this demand, particularly in light of its budget difficulties. The state has already wasted too many tax dollars, at least $283,000 at last count, on this ill-advised, and ultimately doomed, attempt at state-sponsored nannyism.”

Statement of Michael D. Gallagher: “This is a win for California’s citizens. This is a clear signal that in California and across the country, the reckless pursuit of anti-video game legislation like this is an exercise in wasting taxpayer money, government time, and state resources. In the end, common sense prevailed with the court determining that, after exhaustive review, video games do not cause psychological or neurological harm to minors. And, that the ESRB rating system, educational campaigns and parental controls are the best tools for parents to help control what their children play.”

Background:

In 2005, the state of California enacted a law to restrict the sale or rental to anyone under the age of 18 of computer and video games that are classified as “violent video games” if the depictions of violence in the games are offensive to the community or if the violence depicted is committed in an “especially heinous, cruel, or depraved” manner. The law was scheduled to go into effect on January 1, 2006.

Prior to the law taking effect, the Video Software Dealers Association (now the Entertainment Merchants Association) and the Entertainment Software Association filed suit against California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and others to prevent its enforcement. The plaintiffs asserted that the law’s restriction on the sale or rental of certain violent video games violates their rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution to freedom of expression and equal protection of the laws and is unconstitutionally vague.

In August 2007, a federal district court judge granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs and permanently barred enforcement of California’s video game law. In doing so, the judge ruled that video games are protected by the First Amendment, the law is unduly restrictive and uses overly broad definitions, and the state failed to show that the limitations on violent video games would actually protect children.

The state of California appealed the summary judgment ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit heard oral arguments on the appeal on October 29, 2008 at a special sitting at McGeorge School of Law in Sacramento, CA.

Additional information and links to case documents are at:
http://www.entmerch.org/schwarzenneger.html

The Entertainment Merchants Association is the not-for-profit international trade association dedicated to advancing the interests of the $33 billion home entertainment industry. EMA represents approximately 600 companies throughout the United States, Canada, and other nations. Its members operate approximately 20,000 retail outlets in the U.S. that sell and/or rent DVDs and computer and console video games and digitally distributed versions of these products. Membership comprises the full spectrum of retailers (from single-store specialists to multi-line mass merchants, and both brick and mortar and online stores), distributors, the home video divisions of major and independent motion picture studios, and other related businesses that constitute and support the home entertainment industry. EMA was established in April 2006 through the merger of the Video Software Dealers Association (VSDA) and the Interactive Entertainment Merchants Association (IEMA).

The Entertainment Software Association is the U.S. association dedicated to serving the business and public affairs needs of companies publishing interactive games for video game consoles, handheld devices, personal computers and the Internet. The ESA offers services to interactive entertainment software publishers including a global anti-piracy program, owning the E3 Media & Business Summit, business and consumer research, federal and state government relations, First Amendment and intellectual property protection efforts. For more information, please visit www.theESA.com.

###

Popularity: unranked [?]

As Predicted, Ninth Circuit Court Of Appeals Upholds Permanent Injunction Of CA Sales Law

Today, the Ninth Circuit affirmed a federal District Court’s ruling that California’s statute restricting the sale of violent video games to minors was unconstitutional. Read the rest of this entry »

Popularity: 17% [?]

Who is Mark Thomas?

You probably remember him as this guy (not to be confused with that guy). But WHO IS KAISER SOZE?

Actually what Midway creditors want to know is who he REALLY is, and how was he able to purchase Midway for $100,000. Remember these creditors hold some $100+ million of debt, and they’ve filed a motion in the U.S. Bankruptcy court alleging insider debt issuance. Gamepolitics has an analysis, but basically what it comes down to is an allegation that Thomas was improperly issued secured debt (which takes priority over unsecured debt), when he purchased the company. Potentially, now Thomas stands to get first dibs on any incoming repayment of the debts to Midway; and depending what he does with the company he could reap some big returns and leave the unsecured debtors high and dry. As a bonus, Gamepolitics provides us via Kotaku a link to the Chicago Tribune’s guessing game as to who Thomas really is.

Popularity: unranked [?]

Swedish Pirate Bay Trial Begins, Kind-of

The founders of the Swedish torrent site The Pirate Bay (one of the oldest and best known torrent sites) began their criminal trials Monday. Fredrik Neij, Gottfrid Svartholm, Peter Sunde and Carl Lundstroem were charged with “promoting violations by other people of laws protecting royalties.” The men face prison time (up to 24 months) and potentially hefty fines, possibly in the tens of millions if the entertainment industry has its way.

Except…..the prosecutor in the case has already dismissed some of the charges. The original charge (now dropped) was “complicity in the production of copyrighted material”, while the remaining charge is “complicity to make (copyrighted material) available.” As best as we can understand, under Swedish law this is a criminal copyright case, which appears to be a matter of first instance in Sweden: Does the making available of copyrighted content constitute an infringement? Under U.S. law, the answer is most likely no (as the RIAA has found out to their dismay) but under Swedish law the question is much less certain.

It will be very interesting to see how the Swedish judge rules in this case. We at Gameslaw welcome comments on the issue from industry members, legal professionals and law students, and business analysts — if you’re interested, please let us know via our contact form and we’ll publish it as an article.

Popularity: unranked [?]

World to FTC: No DRM in our Games

In what should come as no surprise to most in the technology community, the Federal Trade Commission’s recent call for comments in regard to its March Digital Rights Management Town Hall Meeting has turned up a vast amount protest against DRM. Interestingly enough, the majority of the comments focused not on the traditional DRM embedded in movies and music, but instead on specific DRM that is found in video games. 

Based on a sampling of over 700 public comments currently posted at the FTC site, it’s obvious that gamers took the opportunity to write to the FTC about issues they’ve encountered with the DRM technologies typically found in PC games.  Comments so far range from a simple mantra to deep philosophical meanderings to the near incomprehensible (although, to be fair, there are a quite a few well thought out arguments). 

The event will take place March 25th at the University of Washington Law School and will be webcasted. An agenda posted by the FTC is available for all to look at.

Popularity: unranked [?]

Greenberg Glusker Game Attorney Recognized

Thanks Kotaku. L.A. Attorney Stephen Smith has been named by the Los Angeles Daily Journal as a member of their “20 Under 40″ award winners, recognizing him outstanding legal work  on behalf of the game industry.

Smith represented Ubisoft against MGA in a licensing dispute over Bratz, as well as  representing Ubisoft in a $10 million copyright infringement claim against Optical Experts Manufacturing  over leaks for Ubi’s Assassin’s Creed, and litigation over rights to Tom Clancy’s brand name.

Congratulations Stephen from all of us here at Gameslaw.

Popularity: 1% [?]