Video Game Publishers Join New Copyright Alliance
Video Game Publishers Join New Copyright Alliance
May 28, 2007
The Entertainment Software Association (ESA), representing video game publishers, has joined with 28 other organizations as part of a brand-new group, the Copyright Alliance.The non-profit organization's mission is described as "promoting the value of copyright as an agent for creativity, jobs and growth."
Other participating organizations include the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), Major League Baseball, Microsoft, Viacom and Disney.
As reported by Digital Media Wire Daily, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) and others in Congress expressed support for the fledgling group. Conyers said:
Strong copyright laws are essential to protect the livelihoods of millions of artists and inventors. But just as importantly, strong copyright is important to all Americans by driving creativity and innovation in our economy.
Former journalist Patrick Ross (left) will head the Copyright Alliance.
A PUBLICATION OF THE ECA
SUBSCRIBE
LOGINGamePolitics ShoutBox
Posted 12/01/08 at 03:56pm
ZippyDSMlee: sqlrob:console=nofixes,control options,no choices=fail
ZippyDSMlee: sqlrob:console=nofixes,control options,no choices=fail
Posted 12/01/08 at 03:24pm
sqlrob: @DeepThorn: That's why I went to console years ago. Steam was the final straw. Windows = offline for my computers
sqlrob: @DeepThorn: That's why I went to console years ago. Steam was the final straw. Windows = offline for my computers
Posted 12/01/08 at 03:23pm
ZippyDSMlee: DeepThorn: KAspersky is all that I sue now, the rest suck,norton has its points but is a system hog.
ZippyDSMlee: DeepThorn: KAspersky is all that I sue now, the rest suck,norton has its points but is a system hog.
Posted 12/01/08 at 03:18pm
DeepThorn: yeah... I need
DeepThorn: yeah... I need
Comments
"Yet take every single game that has ever had StarForce 3 copy-protection. Name me one of those that have sold well enough to cover it’s production costs."
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. - Shadow of Chernobyl. The Russian version, at least.
In other news, I'm fine with the move, I don't pirate games. I don't like the MPAA and RIAA's policy's however.
RIAA is so bad it makes Microsoft look like angels in comparison. However there may be a chance that ESA will not take the dreaded path RIAA took.
So what does this mean for GameStop who makes most of their money off of used game trade-ins?
http://www.jointhecteam.com/index.html
The first example may just involve sloppiness. It's on page 3 of this document:
http://www.jointhecteam.com/pdfs/classroom_activities/4-5_1Join.pdf
The important point to know when reading this page is that copyright law does not protect ideas. It protects only the expression of ideas. Federal copyright law is clear on this point, specifically, 17 U.S.C. 102(b). It says, "In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea . . . ."
In explaining this point on page 3, the ESA makes a bit of a mess. For example, just under "Answers," it says, "Copyright protects only original ideas." The claim that copyright protects ideas is then repeated several more times, though sometimes it's not clear whether the ESA is saying copyright protects ideas or only the expression of ideas. The line between ideas and expression is pretty hazy, but the ESA should at least get the black letter law right. You know, for the children.
In my opinion, this second example is much worse. It's on page 3 of this document:
http://www.jointhecteam.com/pdfs/classroom_activities/4-5_2Lets.pdf
Addressing the teacher, it says, "Conclude this discussion by reminding students that the special rules for respecting intellectual property in school don't apply outside the classroom. Students are allowed to copy short passages of copyrighted text, individual copyrighted images, and excerpts from other copyrighted material in their school work, as long as they credit their sources. This is called 'fair use.' But no one is allowed to copy copyrighted material outside the classroom for any reason without permission." You might want to read that last sentence again.
There are plenty of grey areas in copyright law which lawyers can argue about, but the last sentence is not even arguably correct. In 17 U.S.C. 107, the statute lists several non-exclusive factors for determining whether a particular use of copyrighted materials is fair. Whether a use is for educational purposes is just one factor. It's not a conclusive factor. Even a non-educational, commercial use can be fair, although commercial use does weigh against a finding of fair use. See Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, 510 U.S. 569, 584-85 (1994); Sony Computer Entertainment v. Bleem, 214 F.3d 1022 (9th Cir. 2000).
In fairness, the ESA is more accurate elsewhere. In another document, called the Educator's Guide to Intellectual Property, the ESA recognizes that copyright does not protect ideas and that fair use might actually exist outside of the classroom. But this means someone involved in the production of these classroom materials knew what he or she was doing. This someone should have seen the problems in the other materials.
The Copyright Alliance has a page with lesson plans on it for educators. Right now, the ESA's materials are missing from the list. The Copyright Alliance should probably keep it this way. You know, for the children.
Sources/Links:
17 U.S.C. 102(b):
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000102----0...
17 U.S.C. 107:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000107----0...
Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, 510 U.S. 569 (1994)
http://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/510_US_569.htm
Sony Computer Entertainment v. Bleem, 214 F.3d 1022 (9th Cir. 2000)
http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/04485f8dcbd4e1ea88256952...?
Copyright Alliance Lesson Plans
http://www.copyrightalliance.org/foreducators/lessonplans
Cut copyrights to 5 years, unless it has been actively marketed in that time. In the entertainment industry as it is, that's all you need. If you haven't made a profit on something in 5 years, you never will. Chances are, it's been pulled off the shelves by then, anyway.
Let companies extend trademarks by however long they want, to keep their marketing icons and names out of public domain, so no one else can use it, but don't let a company create a copyright on a form of digital entertainment, that will be long gone and forgotten before the copyright is even up for review.
The key to innovation, is to take what is there, and improve on it. Having 10 billion people who can possibly improve upon any given idea, is a lot better than having 30 people in charge, who will probably decide to just let the property rot and die, secure in the knowledge that no one else will ever be able to do anything with it.
Retail chains have also stopped selling used PC games not only will they not take it in trade or as used but refuse to deal with the used PC game market for nation wide trades to snub it they migth as well drop the sued game market and recrefiy every used game and resale them as new recertifed games at new game price.
The indutry is blinded by the smallest bottom line and because of it I boycott them hard no EB or GS for me most games get bought used at half the price of retail or less they want to paly games with the consumer over small details I will do the same.
PSP is region free but not for UDM movies the PS3 is cross regioned JAP-US,Euro-JAP with the euro PS3 not playing any non euro moives.
Thus the PS3 is not unregioned and should not sale itself on it.
When a 60$ unregioend dvd player is better than a PS3 you have to wonder what game they are playing with consumers.
Sure as hell dose not for recording artists since they more more moeny from Ads,merchandising and touring than from the labels who bleed them dry.
Since "marketing" kills a game within 6 months a upsurge in 5% of sales is not going to save a "bad" game the same can be said for movies....
Strong copyright laws only protect the bottom line of the corporations that rob money from the populace and its more creative citizens.
They are going to press for very forceful DRM (Malware) into games and make legit customers suffer, while pirates will eventually get around it like always.
These DRM costs get passed on to the consumers in many cases, or just make the developers suffer.
Wasn't Galactic Civilizations 2 the most recent game to release that had NO DRM on it?
It also sold very well, and people enjoyed it, since if it got scratched up, they could have a simple back-up to play and keep enjoying their game?
I know some companies wanted them to get pirated like hell after that, since it basically shows that putting forceful DRM on games discourages legit buyers from the games.
In the PC market, I believe that you can't return an opened game b/c some customers find out it has some DRM they truly hate on it. So this in turn usually has them denying buying the game outright, or encourages piracy that doesn't have the DRM on it.
Meh, world seems to be getting worse each day.
Great idea, except for the whole "Region" system they decided to implement. Sure, there are mod chips, but we shouldn't NEED mod chips in the first place to play imports. Thankfully the DS doesn't have that flaw *dunno about the other systems. The DS is the only one I have imports for*
Both these games cashed in big, and NONE of them had any form of piracy protection.
Yet take every single game that has ever had StarForce 3 copy-protection. Name me one of those that have sold well enough to cover it's production costs.
(Also, did anyone else find the 'not for profit' description of the group laughable?)
No.
www.venganza.org ;)
Promote FAIR USE not the media mafiaas nazistic approach.
Copying for yourself or archival purposes is ok.(no duh)
Original Archival Copies can be shared after 5 years.(obviously)
Sharing new personal copies a crime(small fee)
Selling copied items with rights is crime (large fee and jail time)
Mod chips and the alteration to make hardware run backups is legal.(current fair use says this is OUR RIGHT the DMCA removes that right,so whos right?)
Preventing backups to function is illicit(should be)
Circumventing FAIR USE is a crime(fees)
------------------------------------------------
While I am at it why don't these groups go after the media industry for not paying the artists and creators their proper due?the industry is stealing from itself and is blaming the consumers!
Example:Chrono resurrection,bunch of kids make a very very good rehash of a snes classic with fmv and ps2 quality graphics but since squeenix owns the license to chrono trigger they sent them a cease and desist despite the fact that it was for personal use and demo purposes at the time(not all original artwork based ona 2d game not ripping sprites or anything).
The entire human race depends on one person copying another (we even learn how to do all the current things we do through imitation such as walking,talking,eating even how we go about doing math)the way things are currently going it wont be long until you can be sued for using a mod chip to play homebrew games for your xbox.
Take a good long look at most inventions over the past...i dunno...entire existence of humans and you will see most ideas come from copying other things be it human or made by nature.If the copying of one idea leads to a improvement of the original then why bother trying to stop it?or why do i have to pay Nintendo to make a game for their systems?I don't remember asking ford what tires i can and cannot put on my car did I?are we looking at a future where a "ch-ch-chenyism!"mod for halo 2-3 when you shoot a comrade in the face with the shotgun lead to a copyright infringement lawsuit?
@mickey the racoon yeah because we all know me downloading a copy of silk worm to play on my nes emulator is actually taking food out of the artists mouth(being as the game hasn't sold a copy from the company that made it in over a decade)?maybe pc piracy is a slight problem but console piracy is quite a different story altogether.
ps:I wonder if SE will come after me if i cosplay as robo from chrono trigger?the way things look it may be a resounding yes a few years from now.
While I'm all for the protection of copyright, even for games, the ESA/ECA should think twice before getting into bed with organizations like the MPAA/RIAA that have proven time and time again that it's not really about compensating the artist, but more about controlling the market.
BULLSHIT.
Games are suffering from blanket piracy. Don't kid yourself otherwise. And dont pretend pirating games doesn't affect the developers.
PC gaming is in crisis, we get nothing but stale console ports. This is mainyl because games are cracked and distributed before even being released. How do all the pirates really think this was going to end? with everyone downlaoding warez copies rather than paying the develoeprs, the whol system is falling apart. Its about time scumbags who crack and distribute other peoples hard work get whats coming to them.
If everyone who played games bought legal copies, the PC games market would be exploding with new titles. As it is, we are the console worlds poor cousin, because we ahve even worse copy protection.
Sorry, but Piracy is not the problem the ESA and ECA would like you to think, particuarly compared to other forms of digital media like music. In fact, highlighting and making people aware of the problem seem more to me to be making more trouble for yourself, but there you go.
So maybe consumers would be less inclined to ignore the industries' wishes if they felt more like the industry was a little more interested in what the customer wants and a little less interested in how much money they have, after all it's a two way road, the industry have to give as well as take if they want to keep their customer base.
Not to mention clone upon clone upon clone of the same game.
I don't believe that illegal emulation falls under "consumer rights".
What, they're promoting a return to the original 14 year limit?
A guy can dream, can't he?
Fun days ahead. Good thing I've started playing TCGs again. Might prove not as expensive as video games soon.
"That’s why I like Canada. Last time I checked, we didn’t have a group of people who arrest you for breaking copyright protection, since we have a special tax on blank CDs/DVDs, or that’s at least to my understanding."
Give it time. The Conservatives are working towards punishing you for using a magic marker to defeat copy protection just as much as the US does. And the levy doesn't protect you, it's more a "we'll, since we haven't gotten around to updating the law, let's just punish everyone instead"...
lets hope the ECA can do it job and keep the ESA from becoming the RIAA of games.
If this isn't a sign they're really not "on our side" I don't know what is.
Even so, althought the practice of illegal downloading of music is , well, illegal, saying that artist loose money on it is just asinine. The music industries profit has risen astronomically, mainly due to iTunes legal download abilities and other legal mp3 download methods.
The movie industry and game industry have more right to complain, since their products do not have the kind of legal options for downloading them.
Copyright's a broken system, and given that its membership includes Disney, Microsoft and the aforementioned MAFIAA, rather than fixing the problems it looks like this Alliance is just going to make things harder for legitimate customers while having no effect at all on the people actually ripping them off.
[/rant]
When you ;lay with mongrels you get fleas. Birds of a feather flock together. Mafia bases who conspire together raise our ire together.
The ESA joining an organization that includes the MPAA and the RIAA does not mean that the ESA is going to demand that all games have built in DRM. It just means that they have an interest in protecting the rights of the creators of games.
There can be a lot to learn from these other organizations if only how not to run things. So I see that this could be a very good thing for the video game industry.
That's the question that most pirates answer, in their own way. Are they right? Well, that's not an easy question to answer, in any case...
I used Poe as an example because of the blatant piracy of his work. He made very little money off his work in the US and absolutely no money outside the US.
I was not saying that this is the state of affairs at this time. I hate DRM just as much as you guys. I want to back up my games, movies and music. I want to be able to use my game how I want.
What I am against is copying, distributing and using media you did not pay for. I know that the middle man cheats the creator of the IP out of more than the pirates do. There is no doubt about that.
What I am saying is that those who support piracy and Hate what the Copyright Alliance stands for, need to grow up and realize that "Stick it to the man." is not a valid way of life or a good slogan.
Back on topic:
This argument is the same one playing out on thousands upon thousands of websites everyday. All the anti-copyright voices sound like whiny teenagers while the pro-copyright side sounds like bitter right-wingers. Nobody (save for a very select few) seems capable of engaging in an intellectual debate on the subject.
With so many outlets competing for our entertainment dollar, consumers are forced to make tough decisions about the things they spend money on.
Unfortunately, the industry is well aware of our limited funds and tries its best to lure us in with flashy trailers and expertly-scripted demos.
If you don't believe the consumers are saying something about it, go to PC game publishers' official forums. Consumers are fed up with buggy, DRM-riddled software that does not live up to the ad campaign's hype.
The point here is that the various industries are pushing their customers away as quickly as they can. Be it the ludicrous prices the music industry puts on CDs, the uninspired plot rehashings the movie industry crams into our theaters, or the barely-functional trash the game industry puts on store shelves, the perceived value of each of these forms of entertainment has dropped significantly.
An ever-growing group of consumers has had enough. Personally, I am "off the grid" of each of these industries. I am blessed to have a large number of quality used CD/DVD stores in my area and I exclusively patron these establishments.
We all believe that artists should be compensated for their work. If I could buy my music directly from the band, I would. If I could pay game developers directly, I would. Unfortunately, the middlemen have gotten in the way and have destroyed a generation's faith in an industry.
The proverbial cat is out of the bag now. Back in the days of nibbler software, copying was a largely community-based affair. Today, with the advent of P2P and the proliferation of broadband, piracy is an impersonal, ridiculously simple process.
The big thing to take home here is that it will not stop. No amount of preaching, lawmaking, wiretapping, or anything will destroy the spirit of the pirate community. Take a look at thepiratebay.org if you don't believe me. Just like the war on drugs, the war on terror, the war on poverty, the war on homelessness and the war on hunger, the war on piracy is yet another bottomless moneypit for the American government to waste our tax dollars fighting.
Pro or Con, the reality is that piracy is (and always has been) a part of our world. Shortsightedness, combined with the explosiveness of the Internet, created an epidemic for which there is no cure.
Not to mention, the US release of Stalker has NO copy-protection, yet supposedly it actually sells.
Clarification: Piracy is bad, and yes it hurts game developers. But the amount of pirates stopped by even such piracy protection systems as the FADE system for Operation FlashPoint and the infamous StarForce 3 have time and time again proven to be not even in the 5-digit numbers!!!
Compare the small number of prevented theft to the some times HUGE costs of maintaining and implementing security features of these sizes, and factor in how many LEGAL buyers who still have issues with the often overreactive protection systems, not to mention users are no longer be able to backup their games in case their original cd is damaged beyond use.
More than often the inclusion of a strong protection system in entertainment software has led to smaller end-profits than it has to lessening piracy.
A system that has often proven itself successful, at least when it comes to internet playability, is the CD-Key.
As for copyrighting - it's a tricky deal. I'm all for the protection of IP, as long as it doesn't mean the stiffling of creativity and preventing accessability for the user. Strong copyrights aren't nescessarily against creativity, but they can easily have serious effects on it.
I personally hope they will not.
The main people who watch copied films and play ripped games are the ones who cant necessarily afford to keep on paying out for things that inevitably end up being a huge disappointment. I for one have recently got an Xbox 360, i used to have a modded xbox with 15 odd genuine games and over 100 copied games, Out of the 100+ copied games i would probably only play 3 or 4 of them as the quality of the rest is just not worth buying. Now i have 8 games for the 360, I'm actually only playing 3 of them as the rest are just crap. Who is seriously gonna keep paying out for stuff they don't end up liking, Who is seriously gonna pay £15-£20 for a movie your probably only gonna watch 3 times max when you can get them online for nothing.
Maybe its time ISP's pay a small fee towards the copyrighted materials that are available and we as consumers are given freedom to try and use anything we see fit. Technology has made it possible for anyone to share anything, Its the way forward.
Just a point to consider... Ratings.. the whole TV industry is based on seeing what shows are popular and what shows arent. Now the way it works is that a handfull of individuals have a little box that tells the networks what they are watching, they then estimate how many per user recorded is watching the show, which is a really bad way of doing it. Now if they released the show on a torrent site that is their own, or is a consortium of the different networks they could get genuine numbers of viewers.
If there were sites where advertisers paid for licensing costs and then the consumers could download if they watch adverts for the sponsors then it would give the average joe a chance to explore what is out there and not be limited by what they can afford at the time. Infact that is exactly how the TV networks keep on going, We don't pay them, their sponsors pay to advertise and we the consumer get to watch what they show with the slight inconvenience of a break every 10 minutes.
All i can really say is pirates are a global thing. Do they want to punish the average person who downloads something coz they want a bit of entertainment, or should they turn their efforts to the ones who make and distribute the cracks and patches. I think the answer is obvious. Just look at the police, they don't go for the drug addicts, you go for the dealers. If you truly want to stop something you cut the head off at the source.
Yes, and do you have the sales numbers for the Russian release of that game?
Also, how is that version selling comparative to the SecuRom version?
Seeing how other games released with the invasive StarForce protection system have sold, I strongly doubt it is selling all that well.
@ E. Zachary Knight.
Hell yes is piracy illegal. But it doesn't help pouring millions of dollars into useless and downright invasive (sometimes legal consumer-hitting) protection systems that WON'T prevent anything. Relic understood this.
Heck, do I need to pull up the StarForce fiasco regarding Galactic Civilizations 2? A top selling game with NO copy-protection, no less?
However, people are getting strong copyright laws and long copyright terms confused. Long copyright terms are harmful to the community, as they reduce or remove the incentive for content producers to keep producing - they encourage a drive to create one big blockbuster hit, and live off the proceeds for the rest of one's life. Long terms also make it much harder for people to create derivative works.
Take, for example, Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland series. The copyright has expired on it, and it has spawned a great deal of derivative and referential works, such as the PC game, Alice. If Alice in Wonderland and Carroll's other works were still in copyright, this, and many other works, would not have been made. The influence spreads further, as well - Philip Jose Farmer's series, The Dungeon, refers directly to Charles Dodgson (the real name of Lewis Carroll) and his works at several points.
Spider Robinson, a science fiction writer, wrote a short story about copyright duration, called Melancholy Elephants. Immediately after writing it, he and his publisher made it public domain. It can be downloaded and/or read here:
http://www.spiderrobinson.com/melancholyelephants.html
Nobody's saying, or at least nobody rational, that artists shouldn't be rewarded for their work, or that the essential idea behind copyright is wrong. However, saying that because the central idea is a good one, the system cannot possibly be broken is utterly insane.
The current copyright enforcement system is not in the least bit concerned with artist rights; it's been twisted and lobotomized to protect publisher interests over the original artists.
In fact, last year the RIAA tried to get the rates changed so that they could get away with paying the original artists less in royalties than they're entitled to.
If Edgar Allen Poe was writing his stuff under today's copyright laws, he'd be just as poor as he was in the 1800s - all his money would be stuffing the pockets of the publishers while he got a pittance for his efforts.
And in any case, I have no problem at all with copyright for the duration of an artist's life. However, to extend copyright to 50 years after the artist's death seems ridiculous to me. The artist isn't going to profit anymore once they've passed away, and I don't believe in giving their estate a free ride on someone else's work.
Copyright protection and DRM are not the same thing. The goal of the copyright is to give you exclusive rights to the use of your characters and stories, images, music etc as you see fit and to make money off of it. DRM is just one way of ensuring that. It may not be the best way but it is a way.
Have any of you ever heard of Edgar Alen Poe. This man is known around the world for his creative and often disturbing poetry. His work is read in class rooms and homes every day. Unfortunately for him he died a poor man. He published his work when there was very little copyright protection. His work was stolen and published over seas and he did not recieve a dime for it.
Do you think those that stole his work and published it with out his consent were justified in that? I don't.
For those of you who keep bringing up Chrono Resurection, Square was completly justified in their cease and desist notice. There is more was to make money off a game besides selling it. Just having ads on the download site will bring in revenue from someone elses IP. I do not think that that falls under fair use.
Piracy is wrong, so get over it. Grow some balls and drive to the friggin store and buy the stupid game/movie/music. The music, movie and game companies making stupid stuff is not a reason to steal it. If it sucks don't buy it. IF it is good buy it. I have a hard time believing you when you say, "If I had the money and the game was good, I would buy it." the truth is if you are stealing the stuff now you probably will steal it when you have the means to buy it legitimately.
Also if you want to try before you buy, tell the game publishers and developers that you want a quality demo to try, not just an alpha level demo. Tell the movie companies that you want a better trailer. Tell the music company that you want to hear music over internet radio. You don't get anywhere by griping to other people like you. You need to take your gripes to the people who can do something about it and tell them in a reasonable and coherent way. Don't rant at them, that gets you nowhere.
Copyright is a good thing, it makes sure that the creator gets the income they deserve. If we drop copyright, everyone will end up like Poe and die paupers because of people like you.
Armed resistance
I agree that the RIAA could be a bad influence on ESA. But what would the ESA get out of becoming a new RIAA. The ESA is a non-profit organization with no finacial interests in sueing everyone. They do not get any money from game sales.
Additionally, the ESA could be a good influence on the RIAA and help them see some kind of error in their madness(I wish).
But the organization the ESA is joining is not run by the RIAA. The RIAA is just another member group.
As nice as this sounds, according to the FBI's statistics, upwards of 80% of arrests are for simple possesion, most being for soft drugs. (http://www.allcountries.org/uscensus/347_drug_arrest_rates_for_drug_abus...) As despicable as the RIAA's business practices are, the War on Drugs is a much worse model; I can't recall the RIAA ever actually killing anyone, much less an innocent person (http://blogs.salon.com/0002762/stories/2003/08/17/drugWarVictims.html)
Most of us no problem with the ESA standing up for copyright laws, and most of us agree with stopping rampant piracy.
What we DON'T agree with is how the RIAA handle things. NEITHER are in it to "protect the original artists", they're in it to further line their wallets by sueing downloaders for far more than they could ever pay back. The RIAA sued a 12 YEAR OLD GIRL for downloading music. They didn't do it to "protect the original artist", they did it to make an example. They threaten these people with astronomical lawsuites, then let them settle out of court by giving them all the money they have. It's dirty pool no matter how you look at it.
And, as you said in your original post, we HAVE been telling the music and movie industry that we want to be able to sample albums before we buy, we say it every time they ask why we download, but we NEVER hear them talking about how they're going to implement a "try it before you buy it" scenario. It's actually quite simple, just setup a free site where everyone can sign up, and stream an album for a certain amount of time (a week or so), after that you get the option to buy it online, or you can't listen again. If someone records the streams, they can be banned, and there are ways to block users from signing up under an alias. Everything they'd need to set that up is readily available, they just don't care.
The RIAA is only giving a limited number of "options" to those who are downloading illegaly, but don't mind paying for an album they know they want. Either pay less and download the album, but be severly limited to the PMP's (iPods and such), or pay more to buy a music CD that you can rip down in any format you choose or DRM free albums. If you want to preview the album, you can listen to very short snipets online, or go into a store like FYE that gives you at least a decent preview of the album.
Either way we're all getting screwed to no end because the archaeic RIAA doesn't want to move into the current century.
Why do I bring all this up? Because the ESA has just signed a deal with the devil, the RIAA. That's not to say that every game is going to come with StarForce level DRM, or they're immediately going to sue everyone who's ever downloaded a game for a million dollars, but there's a big chance for the RIAA to influence the way that the ESA handles piracy. We don't want the ESA to turn into a smug corporate entity only looking out for it's own gain.
The idle scenario, the ESA goes after anyone downloading and emulating games that are still being published. Yes, emulation is illegal in it's entirety, BUT, if the game isn't being published anymore, where does the money go if you buy an old game (Genesis, SNES, NES, Saturn)? It goes to the pocket of whoever is selling it. Gametap is nice, but it pretty much requires a high speed internet connection. Why not create a legal means of emulation, in the vein of iTunes, where you download the software, then pay to download your game of choice, and play it from your local hard drive? Online software distribution would also be a cinch.
Of course people are still going to pirate and emulate the games illegaly, even after all of this takes affect, but when won't they? The idea isn't to completely kill of piracy, it's to severly limit it's impact by being more open and fair to the consumers, while still protecting the original artists and creators. If the ESA can distance itself from the RIAA, while still maintaining a fair and balanced approach to copyright enforcement, then more power to 'em! If they become another RIAA, we're doomed.
If and when Copyright does get re-worked it will be a long time before all of the old farts who run everything get purged and replaced by ether retirement or death and that would take God knows how long that will take before we can take full control of the driver seat to even consider refoming copyright.
"Jabrwock: Disney can go to hell. By abusing their copyright on 50+ year old movies, they are practically creating a demand for pirated copies all on their own."
That 50+ year add-on that I nicknamed "The 100 Year Bono Copyright Rule" thank that greedy songwriting, filmmaking prick Sonny Bono for introducing that. He was thinking about the copyright add-on before he got in to government. Disney just bribed politicians just to make that POS a law because they are just greedy like that.
I would not be surprised they want to sue the people who make AxelxRoxas yoai for using their characters first off and also adding on putting them in to an compromising position that is demeaning to them (the whole think of the children thing if you will). But they can't because Square also has an interest in Kingdom Hearts as well. But I would not put it past them going after people that use their characters in a less then clean light... Disneyland Memorial Orgy picture anyone?
And I don't know if anybody knows this but Bono's wife said that Sonny wanted to make Copyright last forever but could not because of the 1st. Not to be cruel to a dead man or anything but I'm glad he got killed on his ski trip because can anybody here take a guess if he was still alive and the infinity rules for copyright got passed how horrible for everybody that would be. I'm glad for eveybody that did not happen. Even though the MPAA wants what Bono wanted but the only diffrence is that it would still be infinity less a day under their messed up rules they wish for Copyright.
And just cause the ESA agrees with the MPAA and the RIAA, doesn't mean they are or will be the same.
The only folks who get busted most of the time are your average joes on networks that are privately owned (school ones for example)or networks that have given permission to said organizations to snoop around folks surfing habits(usually through happy malware that comes with their network installation cd).
odd thing is they can basically wire tap you without a warrant since the law is so far behind on what wire tapping should be redefined as >.> just look at the whole verizion fiasco with them turning over both internet histories and phone histories to the government with out the executive branch getting the millions of independent search/wire tap warrants they should have gotten.
ps:wonder if i convert my bitorrent download into a phone call of morse code translated back into binary would that make miaa,riaa and eventual esa wire tapping without warrant illegal?
That is how you tell if you should distrust an organaization.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
“Sorry, but Piracy is not the problem the ESA and ECA would like you to think, particuarly compared to other forms of digital media like music”
BULLSHIT.
Games are suffering from blanket piracy. Don’t kid yourself otherwise. And dont pretend pirating games doesn’t affect the developers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you prove that it is Bullshit? After all, remember, we are just about the only consumers lose our right to return simply by opening the packet the game comes in. Every patch of a game is usually incompatible with the previous hacked version, which is good. Piracy is illegal, there's no doubt about that, but if you think it is costing the Industry as much money as they are saying it does, then I'm afraid you are mistaken. The main assumption made in reports such as this is that everyone who downloaded, for example, 3D Studio Max would, had they not downloaded, gone out and paid the money for it.
In some case for a heavy online game it might check the ket against others while you are online.
This approach is worth the price no stupid DRM or you must be online to install or you cant play unless you are online BS, they in time I hope the older games can drop to 5 or ($ 19$ for a 5 year old game (blood omen 2) is a bit much however anyway you got for a new game 40-50 is what you would spend better to support D2D than suxy publishers like edios and Activision that abandon games as soon as they can.
Funny, if I recall correctly, strong copyright STIFLES creativity and innovation, because companies will try to profit off the innovator with lawsuits.
As several people have already mentioned, human innovation and creativity is, and always has been, based on what has come before. Copyright is therefore a complete fallacy. Look at all the things Disney claims to own, when infact almost eveything they create has obvious roots in fairy tails and older mythology, and yet now they feel they can prevent people making new things out of their ideas.
The time will soon come, unless Copyright is completely trashed and reworked to be far more flexible and less controlling, where nobody will risk making anything new in the mass media... it'll simply be too dangerous because of moronic copyright holders and their lawsuits.
If you do actually want to read 17 U.S.C. 102 or 17 U.S.C. 107, the provisions of the Copyright Act I referenced, just Google the provisions and the Cornell Law School links should be at the top of the list.
Alright, so I can't fit into the XL, and I really don't have any gamer friends who could either, so sometimes I sleep in the shirt. But the ECA so far has made me feel like I'm part of something important, something awesome since the ECA stands up for gamers. We needed a corporate voice, and the ECA gives us that.
Then I think of the time I urged a senator on a gaming bill that was unconstitutional and placed a double-standard on games. I think of the time I supported the ECA and told my friends about them trying to get them to join. I think of my future: a future where I'm protesting something that shouldn't be a law, standing up for games on the behalf of the Entertainment Consumers Association.
Then... I read this article again. The ECA, the ones I proudly call myself a part of, is positively reporting on the ESA representing games in a league that involves groups who want to punish and sue the hell out of their VERY customers. The ECA okay with the ESA in a league with the RIAA and the MPAA?
I don't wanna be a part of a group who advocates for suing their customers and passing laws with the sole purpose of protecting outdated, failing business models. The very groups who stand up for patent-stockpiling which stifles innovation and stifles artistic work. Companies who exist for the very reason of litigating those who infringe on their many unrelated patents. It's wrong and it's stupid, it's the formula for success if you wanna alienate and kill off your customer base.
***I'm the guy who might download some Saosin songs then become a fan and attend 3 different concerts featuring Saosin.
***I'm the guy who might mod my PS2 aftering buying it so I can play import titles and make playable backups of the games I own.
***I'm the guy who might play NES ROMs that aren't on Wii because I missed the games 20 years ago when I had an NES. I wouldn't buy the game if it was available anyway, I would never experience that work of art unless it was available in ROM form like it is.
Proceed with caution. If the ECA joins in with these other groups and it associates with them then the ECA runs the risk of losing everything its been trying achieve; most importantly its members. Please, ECA, don't let this organization become what the RIAA and MPAA have... if you guys support a league with their backwards thinking and economic stupidity, you won't have my support and many other gamers like me.
***We're the guys who represent gaming, we're gamers. We despise the RIAA-types for perfectly legitimate reasons. It's a no-brainer- economically, logically, and historically.