ECA’s Hal Halpin Dishes on Anti-Streaming Bill

July 7, 2011 -

In an interview with Destructoid, ECA big cheese Hal Halpin discusses why gamers should worry about S.978, a bill that would make streaming copyrighted material a felony.

“I understand the intent that the legislators and trade associations have with the bill,” said Halpin, “but it’s so broad that it casts a very wide net, including people who innocently post video captures of their gameplay! Alone, that represents a huge community of people.”

“This bill, as written, will apply to anyone who plays and posts their gameplay online, which is a huge percentage of gamers. It could also apply to pro gamers who stream their gameplay for fans as easily as it applies to companies whose entire existence relies on streaming technology (i.e. Steam, Netflix, Gamefly/D2D, Major League Gaming, EA/Origin, OnLive and Gaikai, etc.).”

Uh-oh!  I posted a couple of speed runs just this week.  I might have to take those down as Halpin thinks this bill is very likely to pass.

“Let’s look at it this way: any legislation that has no opposition looks like an easy vote to legislators. If it looks ok on its face, and none of their constituents are against it, they’ll likely vote for it. Simple as that.”

So what can gamers do?  Halpin has a few suggestions:

“Gamers can make their voices heard through the ECA and take part in our campaigns against this and other similar legislation, by signing up to our Gamers for Digital Rights working group. They don’t necessarily need to be members of the association to join and they’ll then be able to get as involved as they like – getting updated information, newsletters, write letters to legislators via our online tool sets, etc.”

Check out the full interview at Destructoid and see how Halpin responds to awesome questions like: “are [bills such as S.978 and Yee’s violent games law] just being written by people who don't know what they're doing?”

Disclosure: GamePolitics is an ECA publication.

-Reporting from San Diego, GamePolitics Contributing Editor Andrew Eisen


Comments

Re: ECA’s Hal Halpin Dishes on Anti-Streaming Bill

According to Mechman in the comments on Destructoid:

http://www.joystiq.com/2011/07/06/senate-bill-978-not-much-of-a-danger-to-youtube-game-runthroughs/
"The statute can only be enforced in instances where uploaders are "willfully" infringing on a copyright with intent to make money, and is only punishable if said uploader makes (or the game company loses) over $2,500. "

Does this change things at all?

Re: ECA’s Hal Halpin Dishes on Anti-Streaming Bill

Let's see, Google Adsense ads on the web page with the embedded youtube video? That is an intent to make money.

$2,500 in lost revenue for the copyright holder? Considering the movie industry is losing "billions of dollars" each year to piracy, I think it would be pretty easy to claim a $2,500 loss.

The fact that they are embedding the video shows a willful intent too.

Sounds like it could be pretty easy to claim anyone is breaking this law.

E. Zachary Knight
Divine Knight Gaming

Re: ECA’s Hal Halpin Dishes on Anti-Streaming Bill

as it's written, the $2500 bit is one requirement, the other requirement (as an alternative) is

"(ii) the total fair market value of licenses to offer performances of those works would exceed $5,000"

I sort of expect this will end up being the easier requirement to hit and the grievance more often claimed.

Re: ECA’s Hal Halpin Dishes on Anti-Streaming Bill

If the bill isn't changed then a lot of people are going to go through hell to remove their videos

Whilst I presume certain companies would be permitted to use video game footage in game reviews (comapnies like IGN, GameSpot, The Escapist, etc - most of these companies get copies of the game direct anyway) what happens to certain sites like Machinima.com and similar websites?

The main problem I see with the bill is that it seems aimed at a very specific audience (people who stream television shows, movies, music videos, etc) but includes practically any content that can be streamed in a video (aka: most of the digital world).

Aside from that, the bill is just plain retarded anyway. Why work harder to get rid of people not even causing the problem to begin with?

Re: ECA’s Hal Halpin Dishes on Anti-Streaming Bill

Our government is made up of a bunch of prostitutes. They give up their votes to the highest bidders. They don't even write this legislation themselves, their corporate paymasters write the bills and give them to our so called representitives to pass. No one seems to really care though. Not enough to vote these people out of office at least.

Re: ECA’s Hal Halpin Dishes on Anti-Streaming Bill

That's not cool, insulting prostitutes like that man.

Re: ECA’s Hal Halpin Dishes on Anti-Streaming Bill

The problem is not enough people believe it and no one really gets that far without selling out.  It is a horrendous system, that I am certainb is not just US exclusive.


Re: ECA’s Hal Halpin Dishes on Anti-Streaming Bill

It's not. Moving up in politics just requires lip gloss and kneepads, no matter what language.

Re: ECA’s Hal Halpin Dishes on Anti-Streaming Bill

You forgot the lube.

Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.

Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.

Re: ECA’s Hal Halpin Dishes on Anti-Streaming Bill

Lube? What, you think politics would make it EASY? =\

Re: ECA’s Hal Halpin Dishes on Anti-Streaming Bill

What about games like COD Black Ops that let you make video clips of your online gameplay and post it to youtube? 

Re: ECA’s Hal Halpin Dishes on Anti-Streaming Bill

One would have to assume that if it's a feature of a game itself, it would be okay. It's not like the bill is targeting ALL streaming, after all.

 

 

"And though we may pledge fanboy allegiances to different flags, deep down inside we all serve one master, one king. And his name... is GAMING! FOREVER MAY HE REIGN!"

http://www.examiner.com/video-games-in-atlanta/mike-chrysler

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will Code Avarice's Paranautical Activity make its way back onto Steam?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
MechaCrashUnfortunately, you have to focus on the perpetrator to figure out the whys so you can try to prevent it from happening again.10/24/2014 - 10:55pm
quiknkoldpoor girl. poor victims. rather focus on them then the shooter. giving too much thought to the monster takes away from the victims.10/24/2014 - 10:15pm
Andrew EisenFor what it's worth, early reports are painting the motive as "he was pissed that a particular girl wouldn't date him."10/24/2014 - 10:12pm
quiknkoldwell then I suck as a man cause I ask for help when necessary :P10/24/2014 - 10:07pm
Technogeek(That said, mostly I was making the smartass evopsych comment because your post seemed like the kind of just-so story that has come to dominate 99% of its usage.)10/24/2014 - 10:04pm
TechnogeekHell, Liam Neeson built his modern career around it. Cultural factors likely play a far greater role than you appear willing to admit.10/24/2014 - 10:03pm
TechnogeekSeriously, though, the idea of "because women are protectors and that's why they never commit school shootings" is, at best, grossly overreductive. There's nothing inherently feminine about being willing to kill in order to protect one's offspring.10/24/2014 - 10:03pm
MechaCrashThe "toxic masculinity" thing refers to how you have to SUCK IT UP AND BE A MAN because seeking help is seen as weakness, which means you suck at manliness, so it builds and builds and builds until something finally snaps.10/24/2014 - 10:01pm
quiknkoldthere, I'm done. And thats what Christmas is all about, Charlie Brown10/24/2014 - 9:54pm
quiknkoldand I am not spouting Evopsych, technogeek. tbh I never heard the phrase till you said it. I'm going off my observations.10/24/2014 - 9:54pm
quiknkoldmoreover, the guy who did this isnt even white. He was native american according to the news report I read. Also that he went for a specific target. That's a much different picture than a certain Sandy Hook guy who will not be named10/24/2014 - 9:53pm
quiknkoldbut I am also certain nobody in their right mind is committing these shootings singing the Machoman song. these are sick individuals who have given up on life10/24/2014 - 9:51pm
Technogeekevopsych lol10/24/2014 - 9:49pm
quiknkoldWhen you suffer from mental illness, youre more likely to go by instinct. yes. I came off as sexist.10/24/2014 - 9:46pm
quiknkoldmore on somthing they are fixated on. Post Partum Depression is an example. This is why a woman is less likely to go off on a rampage.10/24/2014 - 9:44pm
quiknkoldA Mother will fight to protect her children or her mate. This does not mean they are any different then males when it comes to destruction and mental illness. A Woman has just enough opportunity to be sick like a man. The difference is they will focus10/24/2014 - 9:43pm
quiknkoldsociologist. I've spent years observing and I've come to the conclusion that a big reason men and women are different is because Women are Protectors. Women wont wantonly kill because they are all about protecting what they care about. They are wired this10/24/2014 - 9:43pm
james_fudgeYeah having a penis probably doesn't have a lot to do with it10/24/2014 - 9:32pm
quiknkoldIts Mental Illness. Nobody who is actually sane would willingly walk into a school and commit that. its Mental Illness topped with Teenage Angst. and I'm going to say something that may be construed as sexist, but I dont mean it as such. I mean it as a...10/24/2014 - 9:29pm
Matthew WilsonIt is a worth while discussion, but I dont agree with here premise. I dont belive it has anything to do with masculinity.10/24/2014 - 9:13pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician