ESA Tucks Its Tail Between Its Legs And Pulls SOPA Support

from the can't-be-unpopular dept

The SOPA protests certainly seem to be having their desired effect. We have already seen both SOPA and PIPA shelved, while support within the House and Senate is eroding fast. And now that support is eroding outside Congress, as well. The ESA is the first industry trade group to see the writing on the wall and has now pulled its support of SOPA and PIPA. Sadly, it seems that this statement rings hollow.

From the beginning, ESA has been committed to the passage of balanced legislation to address the illegal theft of intellectual property found on foreign rogue sites.

If the ESA was interested in a balanced approach to the issue of copyright infringement, it would have been looking somewhere other than SOPA and PIPA. We have documented repeatedly that this legislation was far from balanced. From the writing of the legislation, to debating the legislation, to amending the legislation. No one other than supporters of the legislation were given the time of day. None of the opposition's concerns were addressed. Balanced legislation would have been where more than one side had a voice.

Although the need to address this pervasive threat to our industry's creative investment remains, concerns have been expressed about unintended consequences stemming from the current legislative proposals.

You are just now hearing those concerns? We have been voicing them for a while now. Even members of your own VGVN were voicing their concerns. How could you possibly have missed them? From the very moment SOPA and PIPA were released, people have raised concerns. If you actually cared about those concerns, you would have been opposed to the legislation from the beginning.

Accordingly, we call upon Congress, the Obama Administration, and stakeholders to refocus their energies on producing a solution that effectively balances both creative and technology interests. As an industry of innovators and creators, we understand the importance of both technological innovation and content protection and are committed to working with all parties to encourage a balanced solution.

I would also love for all stakeholders, that means everyone, not just entertainment companies and a handful of tech companies, to be involved in this discussion. However, unlike the ESA, I think the first item of business should be actually figuring out what the problem is. The ESA may think the problem is not enough enforcement power over copyright infringement, but we know that is not the case. We already have a solution that balances both creative and technological interests: solving your business model problems. As long as you are looking for a solution that involves increased enforcement, you will not succeed in this modern age.

Filed Under: pipa, protect ip, sopa
Companies: esa

Over 120,000 People Sign Petition Asking EA To Officially Come Out Against SOPA

from the well,-they-should dept

Recently, despite some internet reports to the contrary, we noted that EA had not taken a stance on SOPA -- and it seemed clear the company had no intention to do so. It seems that many EA and video gaming fans don't find that acceptable. They've created an online petition asking EA to actually take a stand on the bills:

The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) is a tool that protects monopolists and targets sites relied on by small-time businesses, like indie game developers and artists, condoning disproportionate action against these sites for any evidence of copyright infringement from any of their users. If EA wants to protect their monopoly so badly, we need to let them know that they will lose far more business by supporting this bill than by allowing indie developers to operate unimpeded. It is obvious that this bill's primary use is to paint a big red bullseye on the main distributors of indie content, protecting the market shares of big-time businesses like Electronic Arts.

EA is a member of the Entertainment Software Association which supports SOPA. It's time for EA to stand up and publicly oppose SOPA. Don't mess with the internet, EA. You will regret it.

It's too bad they don't mention PIPA too, but... As I write this, there are already about 120,000 signatures, which is pretty impressive. Will EA listen?

It seems likely that the company doesn't want to take a stance either way, but as the petition notes, not saying something about this could be just as bad. And it doesn't even have to be anything big. Take, for example, how NVIDIA just came out against the bill. Despite also being a member of the ESA, NVIDIA notes that it disagrees with ESA and doesn't think this bill is the right approach:

NVIDIA wasn’t consulted by ESA in formulating their position on SOPA. Our position is this: we oppose piracy, as it hurts our game-developer partners. However, we do not support SOPA. We don’t believe it is the right solution to the problem. We remain committed to working to address this problem in a constructive and fair manner.

It seems like EA could do the same thing... assuming that it, too, did not work with ESA on its position. Of course, if it did... well... then things are complicated.

Filed Under: petition, pipa, protect ip, sopa, video games
Companies: ea, esa, nvidia

Capcom Tries To Tapdance Out Of Its SOPA Support, Blames 'Bad Journalism' For Its Own Statements

from the not-going-to-cut-it dept

Okay, this is just getting ridiculous. Yesterday, we noted that Capcom was one gaming company that was willing to say that it was in agreement with the ESA on SOPA... and since the ESA has made it clear that it supports SOPA, that's pretty clearly a statement that Capcom supports SOPA. I don't see how else you can interpret a claim that "the ESA represents us on these matters." When you say that someone is acting as your representative, then that means they speak for you. So we reported that accurately.

However, Capcom appears to be trying to backtrack its way out of this, by insisting that it's "bad journalism" to point out exactly what the company said:

We've only ever stated that the ESA represents us in legislative matters (again, like every other publisher). We have not stated any stance on our support (or not) for SOPA. Inferring more than that is bad journalism (which seems to be rampant based upon the rereporting of a six word response to inquiry).

As I noted in the original post, this is why it's dangerous (and not particularly smart) to outsource who represents you entirely. It's great to be a member of an organization that can work with you on what's happening legislatively, but you should never, as a company, completely outsource your own opinion on such things. But that's clearly what Capcom said in their original statement. That's not bad journalism, it's a bad decision by Capcom.

And, of course, Capcom doesn't go so far as to make an actual statement on SOPA. Instead, it claims, "We do not have an internal stance on this particular issue and are not planning to." Then perhaps that's what they should have said originally, rather than pointing journalists to the ESA...

Filed Under: pipa, protect ip, sopa
Companies: capcom, esa

Capcom Confirms: If ESA Is For SOPA, Then So Is Capcom

from the well,-at-least-it's-honest dept

While EA refuses to take an official position on SOPA, pro or con, it appears that some others in the industry are willing to put their name out there as a supporter. We've discussed how the ESA -- the trade group for the industry -- is a supporter, but most individual companies have been hesitant to stake out an official position. However, Digital Trends has the story that Capcom has officially signed on as a supporter of SOPA, by deferring any thinking on the matter to the ESA:

In an email with Digital Trends, a spokeswoman for Capcom said only that "The ESA represents us on these matters."

This seems... dangerous. While it's good to have a trade group who can support you and help educate both you and politicians to issues related to regulation and policy, it's pretty dangerous to completely outsource your views on controversial political issues to third parties, and let them "represent you" on matters that can drive how consumers view your entire company.

Filed Under: copyright, pipa, protect ip, sopa
Companies: capcom, esa

ESA Officially Supports SOPA, VGVN Members Left In The Cold

from the oil-and-water dept

With all the attention video game companies and the ESA are getting over their quiet SOPA support, it seems it is no longer feasible to stay quiet. Over the last few days, a number of outlets have been calling on the ESA to come out in the open in its support for SOPA. It had been listed as a supporter of the bill but had never made an official comment in that regard until now. In a statement to various press outlets, the ESA has said the following:

As an industry of innovators and creators, we understand the importance of both technological innovation and content protection, and do not believe the two are mutually exclusive. Rogue websites – those singularly devoted to profiting from their blatant illegal piracy – restrict demand for legitimate video game products and services, thereby costing jobs. Our industry needs effective remedies to address this specific problem, and we support the House and Senate proposals to achieve this objective. We are mindful of concerns raised about a negative impact on innovation. We look forward to working with the House and Senate, and all interested parties, to find the right balance and define useful remedies to combat willful wrongdoers that do not impede lawful product and business model innovation.

This statement does little but echo the talking points of other supporters of SOPA. So any complaints of job loss or lost revenue have been addressed. However, this new found vocal support has raised a new question within the gaming world: what about the grassroots organization the ESA set up for gamers? During the height of the video game violence debate, the ESA created the Videogame Voters Network (VGVN) as a way for those that buy and play games to add their voice in opposition to legislation regulating violent games. With that debate settled by the Supreme Court, what does the ESA's support for SOPA mean for members of the VGVN? This question was specifically raised by Jim Sterling of Destructoid.

Last year, when free speech in the videogame industry was threatened, you asked for help from gamers. The famous Brown vs. EMA/ESA case provided a landmark ruling that protected videogame content under the First Amendment. You appealed to gamers for their support and coverage, and many gamers rallied around the industry.

Now, when free speech at large is threatened, you not only refuse to fight the threat, you actually join forces with it. You operate a group that claims to protect free speech -- the Videogame Voters Network -- and pretend to champion the rights of gamers, but until you stop supporting the Stop Online Piracy Bill, that's all the VGVN is -- a pretense.

This confusion over the general fate of the VGVN and its implied support for SOPA is not limited to the media either. People visiting its Facebook page have been asking for clarification on the matter. Many have already made the connection that the interests of gamers are only important when those interests mirror those of the games industry. If ever the two should be opposed it would seem that the games industry wins as far as the ESA is concerned. As Jim put it:

It is hypocrisy on a most despicable level to continue supporting SOPA after asking gamers to fight for the rights of the game industry. You are sending the message that you want exclusive freedom for your stable of publishers, while the freedom of others means nothing. You are sending the message that the ESA is an organization that begs for help from a community, only to abandon and betray that community at the earliest convenience. You are the Starscream of trade associations.

While it is pretty easy to draw the conclusion that ESA member companies support SOPA via their membership in the ESA, it is quite another story for the VGVN. People who signed up for the VGVN did so under the idea that their support would go toward protecting the rights of gamers. However, this move by the ESA has shown that idea to be little more than a pretense, as Jim puts it. Why would anyone trust the VGVN in the future, if it actually has one at this point, if it will simply ignore the concerns of its members?

Filed Under: free speech, pipa, protect ip, sopa
Companies: esa, vgvn

Mommy's Best Games Says ESA SOPA Support Should End

from the mommy-knows-best dept

Over all the brouhaha regarding SOPA, a number of industries have come out either for or against SOPA. We have seen comments from the tech, film, music, publishing industries and many consumer organizations. However, one industry that would benefit from SOPA has remained relatively quiet on this front, the video games industry. There have been no actual public comments from any video game company or organization representing video game companies expressing anything in regard to SOPA. Yet, it shouldn't come as a surprise to note that the ESA, the chief lobbying organization of video game publishers, has quietly supported SOPA. This quiet support from the ESA doesn't sit well with at least one game developer, Mommy's Best Games, the developers of Serious Sam Double D.

In a combined call to action for both game developers and gamers, Mommy's Best wants these individuals to contact member companies in an effort to get two reactions: 1) a public statement from the company on its position regarding SOPA. 2) pressure the ESA to pull its support of SOPA.

Fellow gamers developers,
If you work for any of the companies that are ESA members, please talk to your higher ups about contacting the ESA to have them withdraw SOPA support. In effect, your company is supporting the SOPA bill. There are over 30 really great companies that have made amazing games that are effectively supporting the SOPA bill.

Fellow gamers,
If you love those companies, get on your favorite company's forums and complain that they are letting the ESA support SOPA by proxy! And consider writing the actual ESA as well.

While the internet world made a big stink about several companies no longer supporting SOPA, which we pointed out never actually happened, this is a move toward making that dream a reality. If the companies represented by the ESA were to come out against SOPA, the ESA would have only one option, to drop support of SOPA. We have already seen this happen when the BSA dropped support for SOPA after fans of its member companies expressed anger over the implied support for SOPA by those companies. Mommy's Best is hoping for a similar response from the ESA.

Additionally, Mommy's Best points out that over the past few years, the ESA has done some tremendous good for the games industry specifically in its victory over the California law that sought to restrict the sale of violent games and that supporting SOPA is a direct contrast to that legacy.

The Entertainment Software Association (ESA) has done a lot of good for the video games industry, including facilitating the landmark Supreme Court ruling that games should be protected by the First Amendment like books and movies, and promoting STEM to further games and learning.

Unfortunately the ESA is still shown on the SOPA support list. The "Stop Online Piracy Act" bill will be voted on some time this year (probably soon). The proposed bill will likely stifle innovation and self-expression on the internet, and grant corporations plenty of power to abuse, given the broad manner in which the bill is written. If you're wondering what the fuss is all about, here's a detailed explanation as to why constitutional scholars believe the bill infringes on the First Amendment, and a general overview of what the bill is about.

This does call into question the intentions of the ESA. The company claims to support the free speech rights of game developers but supports legislation that would threaten the free speech rights of gamers. Why would this organization not see the disconnect here? Is it that it is still riding on the collective good will of its victory in the Supreme Court and is trying to remain quiet over SOPA in order to maintain that good will? If that is the case, why allow itself to continue to be associated as a supporter of the bill? One would think that supporting SOPA would be a sure fire way to kill any good will an organization has with its customers.

In the end, Mommy's Best provides a number of useful tips for contacting the ESA and its member companies. It also provides a nice template letter on which to base your own letters. I agree with Mommy's Best. It is no longer viable to remain quiet on this issue. It is time for the ESA to come clean with its support.

Filed Under: copyright, pipa, protect ip, sopa, video games
Companies: esa, mommy's best games

EA: We Have Never Taken A Position, Either Way, On SOPA Or PIPA

from the but-should-they dept

As a follow up to our post this morning concerning the status of EA (and Sony and Nintendo) concerning the false report that the three had quietly removed their support of SOPA, we spoke with someone at EA who made it clear that the company has not stated an opinion either way on either SOPA or PIPA.

In September, we joined 400 other companies and associations in a letter asking Congress to explore legislative solutions to piracy. However we NEVER expressed an opinion on any of the specific proposals that have been drafted.

That's what I had assumed prior to my post, but now it's official.

That said, as people have pointed out, EA is a major member of the ESA, and the ESA is listed as a current supporter (pdf) though they were not on the original supporter list.

Separately, while the US Chamber of Commerce letter that EA refers to does not directly support SOPA or PIPA, it certainly implies that the companies would like this kind of legislation. I recognize why EA would like to stay out of making a definitive statement either way on these bills, but it still seems to reflect poorly on the company in the long run. By now these bills have been out for quite some time, and the company surely has had a chance to review them. It seems like it should be willing to make a direct statement one way or the other on how it feels about the bills. The original story may have been wrong, but not stating a position on the bill seems like a cop out to avoid pissing people (on either side) off.

Filed Under: pipa, protect ip, sopa, video games
Companies: ea, esa

Copyright Industries Massive Success Shows That They're Dying And Need More Draconian Copyright Laws?

from the say-what-now? dept

One of the favorite misleading tricks of supporters of more draconian copyright laws is to put out a report each year about the "size" of "the copyright industries," by the "International Intellectual Property Alliance" (a trade group made up of other trade groups, including the RIAA, MPAA, BSA, ESA, NMPA and others) There are numerous problems with this report. First off, it makes the ridiculously wrong assumption that "the copyright industries" exist solely because of copyright law. That is, they use the size of the numbers to suggest that stronger copyright law is necessary. Yet that's ridiculous. They present no evidence that the industries would be any different size, if copyright law were weaker or stronger. They simply present that as the obvious implication. Furthermore, their definition of what makes up "the copyright industries" is insanely broad, and tends to include plenty of operations who don't actually want stricter copyright laws at all. For example, I'm sure Techdirt technically qualifies under whatever measure they're using. After all, we're a publisher, so technically we're in "the content industries." Yet I can tell you right now that exactly zero percent of our revenue is due to copyright law. That's true of many, many of the companies included as being in "the copyright industries."

Unfortunately, this myth persists that if you add up all of the broadly defined "content industries," it somehow shows why you need stricter copyright. But that makes no sense. If they actually showed a direct causal relationship -- or even any evidence that copyright policy directly drives aggregate revenue, they might have some argument. But they don't go near such things. But it doesn't stop grandstanding around the issue. With the latest release, Senators Sheldon Whitehouse and Orrin Hatch, along with Reps. Bob Goodlatte and Adam Schiff, welcomed the various lobbyists who produced this report (i.e., the heads of the ESA, NMPA, RIAA and MPAA) to cheer on the report and use it to falsely pretend this is proof that more draconian copyright laws are important.

This makes no sense and, frankly, it insults the intelligence of just about everyone, to pretend that total revenue within an industry is the automatic indicator of how policy should be determined for that industry. You determine policies based on deltas, not absolutes.

It gets even worse, when you look at the actual report, which shows the industries in question are doing tremendously well. In fact, as many are noting, the report actually appears to undermine the industry's entire argument that "piracy" is somehow decimating their businesses. Instead -- even through a recession, these companies are making a ton of money, and there's no evidence of significant job losses.

It's a pretty weak move when our Congressional leaders to then take those points, that simply do not support the need for more copyright law in any way... and then use it to support such policies. Each year, of course, CCIA puts out a report that shows that if that's how you're going to calculate "the copyright industries," it's only fair to use the same methodology to calculate the industries that are built from "exceptions to copyright law," which turns out to be significantly larger than "the copyright industries." So if any of the elected officials praising this latest report are intellectually honest, they should actually be advocating for weaker copyright laws. After all, the same methodology shows that exceptions to copyright law contribute much more to the economy than copyright law itself.

Filed Under: copyright, copyright industries, orrin hatch, sheldon whitehouse, studies
Companies: bsa, esa, iipa, mpaa, nmpa, riaa

DailyDirt: The Space Shuttle Era Ends Soon...

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

The last space shuttle mission will take place pretty soon, and after that mission, the shuttles are all destined to be stored in museums (and not sent to destroy asteroids headed for Earth). Here are a few more programs for continuing to explore space.

• Here's a brief video tribute to the space shuttle program. Disposable space vehicles, FTW? [url]
• Space enthusiasts seem to be looking forward to more deep-space missions now. Settlement missions sound like exciting programs.. for our great-grandkids. [url]
• The European Space Agency is scheduled to have a re-usable autonomous spacecraft in 2013. Robots want to return to Earth, too. [url]
• China has plans for its own space station set for 2020. It'll be a bit smaller than Mir or the ISS, but it's also supposed to be compatible with ISS modules in case other countries ever want to dock with it. [url]
• To discover more links on space exploration, check out what's floating around in StumbleUpon universe. [url]  

By the way, StumbleUpon can also recommend some good Techdirt articles, too.

Filed Under: space, space shuttle, space stations
Companies: esa, nasa

ISP Accused Of Using One Unsubstantiated Strike From The ESA To Close Down Account

from the one-strike dept

Forget "three strikes," according to some folks, there are ISPs using only a single claim of copyright infringement to kick people off their network. Reader Dez submits a story of a woman who apparently lost her ISP account after the Entertainment Software Association (ESA) sent a single complaint about copyright infringement on her account -- a claim which she insists is bogus:

And then today I get a call from whoever last bought our account saying that they turned our Internet connection off because they received a notice from the Entertainment Software Association that claimed that we had pirated software.

...which is funny because the only thing I have torrented in the past year is Ubuntu. You know, Linux. Freeware Linux.

Needless to say she's not happy. She apparently called the ESA, and they didn't seem to believe her:

And also, fuck the Entertainment Software Association and your phone guy who didn't want to believe that wardriving is a real thing or that perhaps one of our neighbors was using our wifi while I didn't have our router locked down (while setting up the PS3 on the network), or even when it was (it's really not that hard to hack a router).

Now, obviously, this is just one side of the story, but it does seem troubling that an ISP might be kicking people off with no apparent recourse after a single accusation (not conviction) of copyright infringement. Has this happened to anyone else?

Filed Under: copyright, due process, one strike
Companies: esa