MPAA Heavyweight Joins ESA Executive Team
MPAA Heavyweight Joins ESA Executive Team
December 3, 2007
A former movie industry mover and shaker has joined the upper ranks of the Entertainment Software Association, the organization which represents the interests of U.S. video game publishers.
In a press release issued this morning, the ESA announced that Rich Taylor will assume the role of Senior VP for Communications and Research. Taylor formerly served as a Senior VP for the Motion Picture Association of America.
During his MPAA tenure Taylor was responsible for the organization's press and communications efforts and served as primary spokesman and senior strategist for the U.S. film industry.
Of the new hire, ESA president Mike Gallagher said:
The ESA and the video game industry are very lucky to have Rich aboard. Rich’s expertise and extensive experience in communications are a perfect match for the investment, innovation, and creativity of the video game industry.
Dan Glickman, CEO of the MPAA added:
Rich will undoubtedly be a great asset to the [ESA]. Rich has spent many years in the entertainment industry and has a deep knowledge about the opportunities and challenges facing our businesses.
The ESA and MPAA share many of the same goals such as promoting intellectual property rights and reducing piracy across the world. Rich will hit the ground running in his new position and his insight and creativity will be valuable to ESA, just as it was for the MPAA.
The content theme was echoed by Mitch Bainwol, CEO of Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), who said:
It's a great day for the content industries to have a talented veteran rejoin our ranks. Rich is a great addition to the ESA team. We look forward to working with him and all those at ESA on issues important to the content community.
While at the MPAA, Taylor was involved in the group's fight against illegal downloading. His duties appear to have involved visits to college campuses. Taylor assumes the post vacated by Carolyn Rauch earlier this year.
A PUBLICATION OF THE ECA
SUBSCRIBE
LOGINGamePolitics ShoutBox
Posted 10/11/08 at 07:43pm
Chuma: http://theweaselking.livejournal.com/3048562.html
Chuma: http://theweaselking.livejournal.com/3048562.html
Posted 10/11/08 at 07:24pm
Kincyr: the JT/Palin article has quite a few duplicate posts
Kincyr: the JT/Palin article has quite a few duplicate posts
Posted 10/11/08 at 06:02pm
lordlundar: each one they are doing is 36 missions focussing on a faction per, so it's going to be 96 missions altogether
lordlundar: each one they are doing is 36 missions focussing on a faction per, so it's going to be 96 missions altogether
Posted 10/11/08 at 05:16pm
Hitodama: @ZippyDSMlee: As long as I don't have to buy multiplayer agian, I might be alright. Blizz isn't stupid, must have somethin else.
Hitodama: @ZippyDSMlee: As long as I don't have to buy multiplayer agian, I might be alright. Blizz isn't stupid, must have somethin else.
Posted 10/11/08 at 03:51pm
ZippyDSMlee: Star Craft 2 going to be a 3 parter....ouchy!
ZippyDSMlee: Star Craft 2 going to be a 3 parter....ouchy!
Posted 10/11/08 at 02:19pm
VideolandHero: @ ezbiker555- At this point I think he knows he is wrong but he doesn't want to admit it.
VideolandHero: @ ezbiker555- At this point I think he knows he is wrong but he doesn't want to admit it.
Posted 10/11/08 at 02:04pm
GoodRobotUs: ...about sarcasm over his browsing.
GoodRobotUs: ...about sarcasm over his browsing.
Posted 10/11/08 at 02:04pm
GoodRobotUs: LOL I detect a guilty conscience. Apparently it's ok to accuse us of being on Crystal Meth, but he gets all uppity....
GoodRobotUs: LOL I detect a guilty conscience. Apparently it's ok to accuse us of being on Crystal Meth, but he gets all uppity....
Posted 10/11/08 at 12:59pm
ezbiker555: He can't win. JT can't win. I honestly want to cry after reading his comment about Virgina tech. How can he still blame video games for VT when there was none proven to be involved. I'm at a lost of words here.
ezbiker555: He can't win. JT can't win. I honestly want to cry after reading his comment about Virgina tech. How can he still blame video games for VT when there was none proven to be involved. I'm at a lost of words here.
Posted 10/11/08 at 11:47am
gamepolitics: T-Bone, ur correct. No one will touch this.
gamepolitics: T-Bone, ur correct. No one will touch this.
Posted 10/11/08 at 11:09am
TBoneTony: Also I would like to add that with each passing generation there is always hope for videogames no matter what is said.
TBoneTony: Also I would like to add that with each passing generation there is always hope for videogames no matter what is said.
Posted 10/11/08 at 11:07am
TBoneTony: also Palin has also got a few things she wants keep quiet about, so she won't go anywhere near JT
TBoneTony: also Palin has also got a few things she wants keep quiet about, so she won't go anywhere near JT
Posted 10/11/08 at 11:06am
TBoneTony: I don't think that Palin wants to get herself into any more trouble than to get involved in the antics soon to be disbarred laye
TBoneTony: I don't think that Palin wants to get herself into any more trouble than to get involved in the antics soon to be disbarred laye
Posted 10/11/08 at 10:13am
gamepolitics: if you are having problems getting registered for GP, shoot me an e-mail : dennisATgamepolitics.com
gamepolitics: if you are having problems getting registered for GP, shoot me an e-mail : dennisATgamepolitics.com
Posted 10/11/08 at 08:07am
Matriculated: http://www.slobsofgaming.com/article/103880/9-esrb-ratings-that-should-exist
Matriculated: http://www.slobsofgaming.com/article/103880/9-esrb-ratings-that-should-exist
Posted 10/11/08 at 06:04am
gamepolitics: if elected, I will not serve... LOL, hilarious, GRU
gamepolitics: if elected, I will not serve... LOL, hilarious, GRU
Posted 10/11/08 at 12:14am
Hitodama: @GoodRobotUs: Haha, nice. Though I can see the edits on moving things. :s
Hitodama: @GoodRobotUs: Haha, nice. Though I can see the edits on moving things. :s
Posted 10/10/08 at 11:36pm
GoodRobotUs: http://tinyurl.com/3qqvb4 LOL
GoodRobotUs: http://tinyurl.com/3qqvb4 LOL
Posted 10/10/08 at 10:49pm
Sigvatr: Predicting this in the next slew of articles: http://games.slashdot.org/games/08/10/10/2331236.shtml
Sigvatr: Predicting this in the next slew of articles: http://games.slashdot.org/games/08/10/10/2331236.shtml
Posted 10/10/08 at 10:24pm
GoodRobotUs: I suspect the site wasn't set up to handle more than around 300 replies
GoodRobotUs: I suspect the site wasn't set up to handle more than around 300 replies
Copyright © 2007 ECA. All rights reserved.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Comments
Oh god, you are sooooo right. Why did I ever think fair use was a good thing.
The less freedoms and rights I have as a consumer the more reason for me to boyycott and simply not buy the product at asking price.
Being able to return a bad game and get store cedit or my money back would be helpful to the industry it would damage poorly designed products faster.
And don't tell me they can not for the better part of almost 2 decades stores took returned media and simple checked them and put them back on the self they still do this with plenty of other items today there is no reason retail can't work more with consuemrs on this ground and retail can show the industry what games are doing badly while the industry gives a damn abotu the product on the shelf.
Also "ownership" is not a dirty word!
the secret is: wait for something newer to show up.
Read: Stomping on consumer rights.
But hey, if this guy can help get politicians and watchdogs of the backs of the game industry, then more power to him.
pretty much what i read, too.
this is good only because it brings some Movie credibility to Video Games but aside from that we, as consumers, aren't going to be thrilled with anything that comes from this guy.
You're well on your way ESA!
Said ESA president Mike Gallagher, "after getting involved with the RIAA and the MPAA it seemed like a no-brainer to approach employees of Hell, Inc. who were looking for new challenges."
"After my time working with the MPAA and the RIAA I look forward to this new position at the ESA," said Beelzebub, adding "I learned so much from those two organizations and I plan to bring that experience with me to the ESA."
RIAA CEO Mitch Brainwol had nothing but praise for Beelzebub. "We worked with Beelzebub when he was still with Hell and his service was exemplary."
Reached for comment, former Beelzebub employer and CEO of Hell, Inc, Satan said, "I was very impressed by Beelzebub's work with the MPAA and the RIAA. Suing your own customers? Treating your customers like criminals? Imposing draconian controls over items that people have legitimately purchased? That's great stuff, real outside the box thinking and that's the sort of stuff Beelzebub and Hell Inc. learned from our association with the RIAA and the MPAA."
Soon we will get the press release anouncing that the ESA will be changing their name from the Entertainment Software Association to the Entertainment Software Association of America just so the accronym will have two A's.
ESAA for the world.
In short, someone fire this guy. Go home Rich Taylor, you aren't wanted here. We need people that have experience deflecting watchdog criticism, not people that have experience stomping on the consumer.
No. The parent organization of Game Politics is the ECA (Entertainment Consumer Association) not the ESA (Entertainment Software Association).
It is a common mistake due to the close resemblance of the acronyms.
No, despite Jack Thompson's claims to the contrary, GP's parent company is the ECA, not the ESA.
NO! ECA - Consumers, not the industry. Entertainment Consumers Association.
To the article: While this is foreboding, I will reserve judment until I know more about this guy, and see what he does at the ESA.
I hate when people say that protecting intellectual proprerty rights = stomping consumer rights.
I suppose one would feel that way if they didn't have anything of intellectual value to offer.
Read the link that GP posted about this jerk's work on college campuses.
You are right, of course, because protecting IP shouldn't be about stomping on your consumers. But all too often, it is. And particularly, the "AA" media congolmerates control so much IP, and lobby so successfully in DC, that it actually stifles creation. (HI Disney, and your 50 years of owning a fariy tale!) So even if I did have anything of "intellectual value to offer" I'd have to worry about the AA-holes stomping on me well before I have to worry about piracy, etc.
Preventing legitimate owners from copying their DVD's to their personal computer for their personal use is not stomping on consumer rights?
Preventing legitimate owners from using no CD software to prevent the wear and tear on the game disk is not stomping on consumer rights?
Out right coming out and saying "If a person copies their CD onto their computer and then to their MP3 player, they are stealing and should have to rebuy the song." is not stomping on consumer rights?
I am not endorcing piracy and downloading a game, movie, song instead of buying it. I am saying that when the legitimate costomer (the one that buys the game, movie, song) is treated like a criminal and is guilty until proven innocent, that is stomping on consumer rights.
I am all for protecting intellectual property rights, but the means that are being deployed are not the best means available nor are they the only means.
Also, attacking the person in lue of the argument is not a very affective means of debate.
The problem is that the MPAA, and the RIAA have made "protecting intellectual proprerty rights" synonymous "with stomping consumer rights".
Stuff like DRM, claiming that copying a cd to your computer to listen to it on your MP3 player is stealing, cracking down on technologies because they can be used for piracy, and so forth. All so corporations can protect their profits while screwing over artists, actors, and writers. Witness the current WGA strike for an example.
Cause, if you are, then you're most definitely not da bomb diggety.
ECA != ESA thankfully.
@dabomb
A few months back, I bought the PC version of Grand Theft Auto, San Andreas. Now, I was not aware until I got home, nor was it made obvious on the package, that the game needs a DVD drive to to even get it installed. I tried to return, but guess what, thanks to anti piracy laws, lobbied for by the ESA, I was stuck with a game I can't play. I'll repeat that. I am STUCK WITH a 35 collar game, which I payed for with my own money, that I can't play all because the ESA decided that if I returned it, I already had it on my PC and was stealing.
If that isn't stomping on consumer rights,I don't know what is.
It's then our decision to purchase the content based on that knowledge or pressure the creators to change their agreements to meet our expectations regarding our private use.
Therefore, we either act in agreement with the terms of purchase, act in defiance (albeit illegally) to protest the agreement, or not purchase the content in protest.
Our true right is the purchasing of the content, but not necessarily how we're able to use that content.
That's not to say I think we're being treated unfairly or not. It's just my opinion on what right I have as a consumer vs. what priviledge I have.
Undeniable rights include safety and quality. Fair use to me would be a priviledge.
Is it in good faith to not accept a return... probably not. Is it wrong for them not to accept a return? Definitely not.
So young, so angry. Damn that DRM'ed rap music!
I would say that the security of one's intellectual property is what's most important.
As for the consumer-I would say that they, being the market, must drive the industry with their dollars. If a consumer purchases intellectual property on a media that cannot be copied then that is their dollar choice.
At the end of the day the consumer has the RIGHT not to purchase based on a product's known limitations.
Fair use has long been established as a consumer right in the US.
It is very important to protect IP but it's equally important to guarantee the rights of consumers. There really isn't a black and white definition because the finer points of what constitutes "fair use" are very malleable but it is generally accepted that the consumer has the right to the content available on the media they purchase and to that end can maintain two copies - the original and a backup or, in the event that the original is destroyed, two backup copies. If the consumer sells the original then they're expected to either sell the backup with the original for no extra cost other then the cost of materials or destroy it.
The thing that's pissing off consumers is that content producers and distributors are saying that you cannot create or use a backup of their content - basically they're saying that you no longer own a copy of the content but you own the media that the content's distributed on and a limited license to view it.
Personally I think that the re-think of content distribution and IP law should involve selling or renting the unlimited right for private consumption of the media. For example, you could purchase the unlimited right to view Jurassic Park and that would entitle you to download the content onto your computer, burn it onto a DVD, stream it to other internet-connected computers that you're logged in to, watch it on your portable media player, lend a copy to a friend, etc etc.
You have it exactly backwards: Copyright -- not fair use -- is a privilege granted by the state for contributing to the public domain. Copyright requires legislation and ongoing governmental involvement. In short, copyright is "unnatural".
Exactly. Unfortunately, the MPAA, RIAA and ESA would like to keep the consumers in the dark over these limitations. Did any of these organizaations anounce publicly the DMCA when they proposed it to congress? Did Sony tell people that their games had Starforce or what it did?
When consumers have all the information they can make those choices. But right now they don't have all the information. These groups would rather them not know. What they do have to share, they often bury it in long legalese laden EULAs and other such documents. These are documents that are not available until after the product has been purchased as well.
So don't give me the nonsense of consumer power. Knowledge is power. That is why these trade groups want to prevent people from getting that knowledge.
Agree with you on all your points except for fair use of content as a right. While historically we have been afforded the luxury of maintenance of content we've purchased through backups of that content has been wonderful, we don't have the right to suggest we should continue to be allowed to continue that practice.
I liken it to being afforded a great luxury for a long period of time and that luxury being taken away due to misuse. Am I upset, absolutely. However, it's something that sometimes you just have to swallow and communicate and try to work out a solution.
@ Adrian: Sorry, I don't understand what your point is. Feel free to be as wordy and boring as I am. I enjoy the conversation.
Fair use was how culture was distributed for eons before commercial entities co-opted culture and the legislators enacted legal protections (aka copyright) to protect the profits of these commercial entities.
Adrian is right, fair use is (was?) natural, copyright is an artificial creation distributing wealth to creators by a contract of law.
Check Wikipedia for the history of copyright law for the whole story: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_copyright_law
Both the ECA and the EFF are two good lobbying organizations that are attempting to restore some balance.
I'm not so sure too, but we haven't heard a word of Rich anyway. If he said the speech from Dan Glickman, then I'd be worried.
I won't judge Rich from his employer decision. I'll wait for HIS speeches and the direction the ESA is taking with him on board. Before that, I stay neutral on this.
I admit I don't know much about Rich beside that he used to work for the MPAA so I don't know his handiwork at the MPAA.
P.S. Note that I despise the MPAA (and RIAA by the way) misuse of copyright laws.
http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20070907195435565
My view that fair use is a right isn't an opinion, it's based on an understanding of US copyright law. Check out this wikipedia entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use
Particularly relevant is this quote from the "Common Misunderstandings" section:
"You can deny fair use by including a disclaimer: Fair use is a right granted to the public on all copyrighted work. Fair use rights take precedence over the author's interest. Thus the copyright holder cannot use a non-binding disclaimer, or notification, to revoke the right of fair use on works. However, binding agreements such as contracts or license agreements may take precedence over fair use rights."
You're right when you say that fair use is a luxury we have historically been awarded, however you don't realize that the extent of that history is what forced the codification of what had been a common law concept into an official law. Businesses tried to circumvent a long-established principle in order to further their own economic ends and the legal doctrine of fair use - both as a right and a defense - was officially established.
MAFIAAECA?
pronouced
MA-FI-A-SCO?
:P
ESA, not ECA.
DOH!
esa.....eso...mmm could work too....
LOL
:P
Sounds good to me, what term do you suggest we replace it with? Copyright, trademark, or something else?
As for the consumer-I would say that they, being the market, must drive the industry with their dollars. If a consumer purchases intellectual property on a media that cannot be copied then that is their dollar choice.
At the end of the day the consumer has the RIGHT not to purchase based on a product’s known limitations. [/quote]
Why do you think piracy continues to flourish??
People no longer wish to deal with the increasingly draconian copy protection methods and nazi-esque "sue them all" tactics to do simple tasks such as:
a) backup your media so that if they physical item is damaged, you still have the content you have paid a license fee to access.
b) transfer a copy of media to a different playback device for personal use. eg. copying a CD to a MP3 player.
c) fair use. A fair use example, if you video your birthday party and a piece of music is playing in the background, you do not have to pay a royalty. The music is incidental to the video, yet if you put it up on youtube someone may issue a take down notice because of that song. How is that fair?
The current system doesn't punish the pirate, who can get DRM free copies of almost any content commercially available (sometimes before it's commercially available). It punishes the legitimate user. That's like going to jail for being a law abiding citizen while the criminals are free.
I call shenanigans, I think Dabomb is just an industry shill...
"The ESA and MPAA share many of the same goals such as promoting intellectual property rights and reducing piracy across the world."
...Intellectual property rights? You mean that price gouging capitalistic shit on steroids implying that a work should be protected for 100+ years? I tell you what ESA SHOULD stand up for:
1. Working to ensure that the content of games recives fair protection and can NEVER be subjected to ANY form of censorship.
2. Opposing console licesining agreements that are currently used to monopolize, censor, and define content in this industry.
3. Standing up for consumers by demanding lower prices for gamers and higher wages for developers. This is the REAL solution to piracy.
4. Reformulating ESRB to erase arbitrary lines in the realm of "adult content" and working the with government to ensure games do not end up in the hands of kids.
5. Aggressive campaigning to inform the community that video games are an intellectual medium for all ages, primarily adults.
I agree with you on what the ESA should do, but that's likely to remain a dream...
I guess this guy may only be used to attend campuses and talk about not downloading or emulating games illegally.
The RIAA's so-called "fight against piracy/protecting IPs" is just a euphism for trampling competition and milking their cash cows with the support of the government.
Pretty quick to drop the industry shill line, eh? I know Dabomb is not one, for a fact. He sits in the cube next to me, actually. So your shenanigans are moot.
Well, they want to make sure we are not buying the game, but only the right to play it. Not make gameplay videos or any other sort of things with it.
IT does not count unless John Bruce is calling him that.
Nothing JT says ever counts. He hasn't had a new idea since 2LC's Cop Killa.