GamePolitics News

Nintendo Comments on Weemote-Wiimote Flap; Online Retailer Pressured

gamepolitics — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 07:48:49 -0500

Yesterday, GamePolitics reported on a small Florida manufacturer's claim that Wiimote, the common, yet unofficial nickname for Nintendo's motion-sensitive Wii controller, was negatively impacting sales of its Weemote, a small TV remote control designed to fit children's hands.

Fobis Technologies president John Stephen told Time:

These days, the little guy like us is wondering, What's the point of trademark protection?

We asked Nintendo for comment and received this from NOA spokesman Charlie Scibetta:

Because Nintendo does not use and does not plan to use the Weemote trademark, we declined Fobis' offer to purchase it. We wish them success with their Weemote.

Stephen told GamePolitics that lawyers for his firm had contacted 100 retailers, large and small, requesting that they cease using the term Wiimote in their marketing. Indeed, GP correspondent Andrew Eisen, a majpr fan of the Wii, pointed out a post by importer NCSX:

Last week, we received a letter from a law firm representing a company which holds the "Weemote™" trademark. The letter stated that we were to stop using the term, "Wiimote" in our product descriptions and NCS Game Notes™ because our actions could possibly cause confusion in the marketplace. NCS respects trademarks and ©opyrights since we also own trademarks and copyrighted material so we're obliging even though we think it's a bit of a stretch... but whatever.

From this day forth, the word "Wiimote" has been banished from N©S' shopping sites and replaced with the word "Wii Remote™." We ~~wasted~~ spent about an hour on Friday making sure the term "Wiimote" was waxed from the NCS shopping experience.

New York Video Game Law: Exclusive FAQ

gamepolitics — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 15:20:41 -0500

Q: Who sponsored New York's video game law?

A: There were two identical versions, one in the NY State Assembly and another in the NY State Senate. The Assembly version (A.11717) was sponsorsed by Assemblyman Joseph Lentol (D, Brooklyn). The Senate version (S.6401-A) was sponsored by Sen. Andrew Lanza (R, Staten Island).

Q. How was it voted on in the legislature?

A. The Assembly version was passed unanimously. The Senate version passed 61-1.

Q. How did the bill get to be law?

A. After approval by the Assembly and Senate, Gov. David Paterson (D) signed it into law on July 22nd.

Q. Is this the same legislation that former Gov. Spitzer was favoring before his hooker incident cost him his job?

A. No. The bill under consideration last year would have made selling an M-rated game to a minor a felony crime. There is no such provision in this law.

Q. What does the law require?

A. The law requires:

Video games sold by retailers in New York State must have a "standardized" and "commonly used" rating displayed on the outside of their packaging.
New console systems sold in NY State must have parental controls
A 16-member advisory council, appointed by the Governor, will a.) study the relationship between violent media and youth violence b.) evaluate the effectiveness of the ESRB rating system and make recommendations concerning it c.) study the potential of creating a parent-teacher violence awareness program to identify and assist potentially violent student

Q: Does the law apply to games sold online as well as in retail stores?

A: No. Although Sen. Lanza's website initially claimed that it did, a reading of the legislation shows that "mail order" businesses, which under NY law include online retailers, are exempt from the rating requirements. GamePolitics contacted Sen. Lanza's staff, which said that the online comment was a mistake and does NOT apply. The law applies ONLY to so-called "brick and mortar" retailers.

Q: Are the current ESRB ratings & content descriptors sufficient to meet the requirements of the law?

A: Yes. As long as a video game available at retail displays an ESRB rating and its associated content descriptors (and they already do), the retailer is in compliance.

Q. What about small publishers or independently created games which are not submitted for an ESRB rating?

A. As long as they are sold via online, no problem. They aren't required to be rated.

Q. Are used games subject to the law?

Small Firm's Weemote Came First, But Steamrolled by Nintendo's Wiimote

gamepolitics — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 10:21:20 -0500

Everyone who follows the video game scene knows that the Wiimote is the unofficial nickname for Nintendo's motion-sensitive Wii controller.

But have you ever heard of the Weemote?

As reported by Time, the Weemote (left) is a small TV remote control, specially designed for children by Fobis Technologies of Miami. The Weemote was trademarked in 2000, roughly six years before the launch of the Wii.

From the Time article:

Nintendo doesn't actually use the term Wiimote in its marketing, but then, it doesn't have to. The Internet takes care of that. Online retailers, from Amazon.com to used-video-game vendors operating out of their houses, advertise the "Wiimote" on their sites, openly or via more obscure means like customer product tags and posted comments.

As a result, says Fobis president John Stephen, since the Wii was released in 2006, the Weemote trademark has been so "diluted" that the Weemote's sales, which are mostly online and total fewer than half a million to date, have fallen considerably. In fact, many Wiimote fans believe it's the Weemote that's guilty of the trademark infringement. "These days," says Stephen, "the little guy like us is wondering, What's the point of trademark protection?"

What has been Nintendo's response? GamePolitics put the question to John Stephen, whose firm manufactures the Weemote:

GP: Is there any legal action pending against Nintendo, or planned?

Stephen: First of all, we are not currently engaged in a legal action with Nintendo or any of their resellers. Our lawyers have mailed approximately 100 letters to sellers of the Wii remote and related accessories who use the wiimote name to market or describe their products. This list includes all the major big box retailers as well as most of the specialty retailers. These requests for cease and desist are required of us by law. If we do not police and enforce our trademark, it could actually be taken from us legally so this is our obligation. This obligation is very costly financially as well as in our time.

GP: Have you had any talks with Nintendo about the issue?

Stephen: Our approach has always been to contact Nintendo on this through our attorneys to see about reaching a business settlement, i.e. they purchase our trademark and we set out to rebrand our company. Our argument is that the damage has been done here (whether intentional or not) and that Nintendo has more to gain now controlling this mark then we do. They asked us to give them an offer which we spent a few months pulling together and after submitting that initial offer, they promptly decided they were not interested anymore and basically closed the door. Though the name weemote is very precious to Fobis Technologies, can you imagine CocaCola with out Coke, or VW without the Beetle or Federal Express with FedEX?

Unfortunately, the reality is we have no leverage and they are already getting a free ride. So I guess their position is why pay for something that is already free!

GP: How has this issue affected you and your business?

We have spent over a year trying to do this in a moral and ethical fashion by talking to them purely from a business standpoint, .i.e. with no threats of any kind. This process eats deeply into our profits and productivity. As a small business owner who has spent the last ten years of my life trying to do the right thing and being passionate about our products, this really unsettles me and makes me seriously question why any innovator in their right mind would want to go down this same road?

When we started our company, we fully believed that our intellectual property would be protected given we did all the proper registrations and due diligence. My wife and I are both entrepreneurs as were our parents. How do we encourage the next generation if this is our legacy?

In my mind, Nintendo may not have done any of this intentionally but it seems one would expect them take some kind of moral high ground in the matter. The fact they have registered for the mark in the European Community, have a re-direct on the www.wiimote.ca domain name in Canada to Nintendo.ca, in combination with freely using metatags on their own site would indicate to me a true slap in the face.

GP: We have a request in to Nintendo for comment.

Report: ESA Committed to Holding E3 in 2009

gamepolitics — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 09:10:41 -0500

The Entertainment Software Association, which operates E3, has told GameSpot that despite rampant criticism of this year's expo the game publishers trade association is already gearing up for the 2009 show.

No additional details were provided. GameSpot attributes this quote to to an unnamed ESA rep:

As we do every year, we're beginning the process of surveying exhibitors and attendees to determine potential changes to the Summit. Once this is completed and shared with the ESA's Board of Directors, we will make an announcement about the specifics of the 2009 E3 Media & Business Summit, which will occur.

GP: While it is the nature of organizations to put on a brave face, there are a couple of facts that need to be weighed against the ESA rep's comments.

The first is that since E3 '08 wrapped up less than a week ago it seems a bit early to commit to a 2009 show. One might expect that exhibitor debriefs as well as a thorough E3 post-mortem need to take place in order to sort out what went wrong and determine whether it is fixable. That's especially true given the fairly widespread negative reaction to this year's expo, including this rather definitive comment attributed by the San Francisco Chronicle to EA CEO John Riccitiello:

I hate E3 like this. Either we need to go back to the old E3, or we'll have to have our own private events.

Moreover, the ESA rep's comment seems to imply that the ESA will tell the board of directors (which is comprised of top execs from ESA member game publishers) what's happening with E3, but we'd expect it will be the other way 'round. And since EA happens to be chairing the ESA board this year, one has to wonder.

TV News Retail Sting, Pt 2: GameStop Perfect; Wal-Mart & Circuit City Drop the Ball

gamepolitics — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 08:33:57 -0500

Yesterday GamePolitics reported on the first part of a video game retail sting conducted by reporter Joce Sterman of Baltimore's ABC-2. Readers may recall that Best Buy registered a perfect score by turning down an underage secret shopper during all three attempts to purchase M-rated game. Target? Not so good...

In part 2, GameStop came up a winner, also registering a perfect score. That's not too surprising given that the Federal Trade Commission reported earlier this year that GameStop clerks successfully carded the government agency's secret shoppers 94% of the time.

Wal-Mart and Circuit City, however, did not fare as well. From the ABC-2 report:

[The secret shopper] was also carded at the Circuit City in Towson, but employees at two of their other stores in Catonsville and Rosedale didn't even ask... The games he pocketed from those places were Prey and Vice City Stories from the notorious Grand Theft Auto series...

Our mystery shopper got plenty of action on his trips to Wal-Mart. One store in Pikesville turned him down, but two others in Towson and Port Covington were a success on the sale... This time he walked away with Timeshift and Halo 3.

Both Circuit City and Wal-Mart issued statements apologizing for their employees. Circuit City said:

We will talk with management at the stores to determine exactly what happened. When we do, we will take appropriate action... Circuit City does not carry video games and computer software which receive the "Adult Only" rating... Our store associates receive training regarding the sale of mature content when they first start to work at Circuit City and ongoing training on the subject... Store associates are instructed that failure to enforce the policy could result in consequences up to and including termination of employment.

From Wal-Mart:

Though we do not have the details of your report and it sounds like an isolated situation, we are working with management at these two stores who already are taking steps to ensure associates understand the importance of ID check and this policy.

Video Hosting Site Bans Game Play Footage as Not "Creative Expression"

gamepolitics — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 08:01:17 -0500

Want to show off your best GTA IV stunts?

You'd better post it on YouTube since video hosting site Vimeo has decided that it will no longer accept game play footage unless it is of the machinima variety. Currently hosted videos containing "game walk-throughs, game strategy videos, depictions of player vs player battles, raids, fraps," etc. will be deleted on September 1st.

A post on the service's staff blog explains the decision:

The Vimeo staff does not feel that videos which are direct captures of video game play truly constitute "creative expression". Further, such videos may expose Vimeo to liability from the game creator(s), as we have already seen action from popular video game companies against videos such as these... Gaming videos are by nature significantly larger and longer than any other genre on Vimeo...

his decision was not easy, and there was much debate internally; however, we feel this decision will benefit Vimeo in the long run and better benefit the video makers it was created for. Our resources are limited and they must be channeled towards maintaining our goals.

Negative reaction to the decision is beginning to trickle in. From Spinfocalypse:

The reasons cited seem to be a little contradictory and subjective... “Creative Expression” is not something I’d personally want to touch, because it gets into a social subjectivity issue. A game video for one person may not be ‘creative’ and a ‘lip-dub’ video may not be to another...

The second reason cited is the ‘processing time’... This part of Vimeo’s argument is rather weak– and as someone always looking for reliable video hosting– doesn’t give me much faith in the ability of their transcoders or stability of their bandwidth... Game videos can be one second or one hour, the same as traditional video...

What’s a bit disturbing about Vimeo’s decision is that a service is taking the role of editorial... Games, gamers, game videos– however you view them– will be forced into a box and segregated because of perceived notions about the space... I know I’ve personally exposed people to ideas and concepts, by way of games, that don’t require anyone to play or have an interest in games. That just won’t be happening on Vimeo anymore.

More on Disappointing E3 from Ars Technica, MacWorld

gamepolitics — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 07:36:34 -0500

Media reaction to 2008's disappointing E3 continues...

Calling this year's show a "complete dud," Ben Kuchera of Ars Technica weighs in with his own four-point program for reviving the once-great expo:

Take pride in outward appearances... A few banners for big-name games, some creativity in the meeting rooms... these things would go a long way towards getting people excited about the show.
The keynote should be given by someone we want to hear from... Texas Governor Rick Perry delivered this year's keynote, and it sounded more like a commercial for Texas than analysis into the industry... Give us someone who actually makes games, who can speak to why we love this business... How can a show that is completely filled with interesting games and fascinating people have a keynote so stupefyingly boring?
If you have a press conference, make it worth going to... Sitting through a press conference, in most cases, is a waste of time that you could spend getting more hands-on experience or talking to people. It's easier and quicker to skip the meeting, grab the press materials, and be done with it.

Find a new, better venue. Hint: it doesn't have to be in LA... Why not move it? ...From a social, technological, and even convenience standpoint, Vegas has it all over the Los Angeles convention center.

In his critique of E3, Peter Cohen of MacWorld focuses on game publishers, the ESA and its president, Michael Gallagher:

Last week the E3 [expo]... took place, but you probably wouldn't have known it unless you're in the video game business... the event came up short... and the shortcomings weren't missed or overlooked by gaming executives... They miss the spectacle of the old show... They miss the grandeur, the attention the world paid. In short, they miss some of the same things that, two years ago, they were complaining about.

The ESA [which runs E3] has had a tough year. The organization, which represents the video game industry on Capitol Hill... has lost several high-profile members... Some attribute the defections to a change in leadership... Doug Lowenstein, the organization's founder and former president, stepped down in 2007... [and] was replaced by Michael Gallagher, a refugee from the telecom industry who maintains a much lower profile than Lowenstein ever did...

There's certainly a place for a major gaming event in North America... One thing is for sure--the way [the game industry is] doing it just isn't working for anyone, not the industry, not the public, not the press.

Video Spoofs Politically-themed Games

gamepolitics — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 07:01:19 -0500

Just for Laughs serves up spoof video about a fictitious company engaged in making games with political themes...

TV Debate on New York Video Game Law

gamepolitics — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 17:52:34 -0500

Is New York's video game law necessary?

Is it constitutional?

Dr. Michael Rich, Director of the Center for Media and Child Health at Harvard Medical School, and Adam Thierer, Senior Fellow at the Progress & Freedom Foundation in Washington, D.C., squared off on the Bloomberg network to debate the merits of the New York law signed last night by Gov. David Paterson.

Thierer believes the law is unnecessary and will be struck down as unconstitutional. Dr. Rich worries about the training abilities of games in relation to violence and wants social science injected into the game rating process.

GP: We agree that the New York law is unnecessary. However, if the video game industry doesn't challenge it - and it's not at all clear that they will - then there will be no finding that it is unconstitutional.

So, why wouldn't the game biz challenge the law?

Because it has no effect on their bottom line. The content ratings and parental controls mandated by the law are already in place. While the industry might argue that the state is compelling this sort of speech, it's an argument that exists in a somewhat theoretical realm. In practice, the industry is already meeting the requirements. Game publishers and retailers would rather do business than argue the finer points of constitutional law. Moreover, for the game biz there's a political downside to fighting this part of the law. Doing so would be tantamount to saying, "Yes, we have ratings and parental controls, but we might want to take them away someday." Such a position would not be comforting to parents and would provide ammunition to critics.

The law's mandated advisory council on video game violence enjoys First Amendment rights of its own. People, government bureaucrats included, are free to study and discuss whatever they like. Besides, the video game publishers and retailers will occupy two of the 16 seats on the advisory council.

As to Dr. Rich, while he may have desire to include social science in game ratings, that is not part of the New York law. The statute gives New York no power whatsoever over the ESRB rating process.

And, we note, the announcer gets it completely wrong in his opening when he says that the law includes "tough fines for retailers who sell adult games to kids." There's nothing like that in the legislation.

Adam Thierer lays out his position in detail at the Technology Liberation Front.

BREAKING - New York Governor Signs Video Game Bill Into Law

gamepolitics — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 12:10:37 -0500

GamePolitics has confirmed that, last night, New York Gov. David Paterson (left) signed video game legislation passed by the Senate and Assembly into law.

UPDATE: We've obtained a copy of the Governor's press release on the video game bill signing:

Governor David A. Paterson signed a package of bills, many of which are focused on public safety and protecting the rights of New York residents. [One of these will] ensure the State will explore the negative effects of violent video games.

“We have the obligation to be constantly vigilant about amending our laws to protect the residents of New York State. Many of these bills will do just that by closing loopholes or creating new laws to enhance the quality of life for all New Yorkers,” said Governor Paterson...

...other bills signed by Governor Paterson are directly aimed at protecting children... A.11717 / S.6401-A [the video game bill] establishes an advisory council to conduct a study on the connection between interactive media and real-life violence in minors exposed to such media. This bill will also require new video game consoles to have parental lockout features by 2010, and mandate that games sold at retail disclose the ratings obtained from the gaming industry's voluntary rating system.

GamePolitics has received this comment from Richard Taylor, Senior Vice President of Communications and Research for the Entertainment Software Association:

The state has ignored legal precedent, common sense and the wishes of many New Yorkers in enacting this unnecessary bill. This government intrusion will cost taxpayers money and impose unconstitutional mandates for activities and technologies that are already voluntarily in place. It also unfairly singles out the videogame industry over all other forms of media. One wonders where this overreach by government in New York will end. If New York lawmakers feel it is the role of government to convene a government commission on game content, they could next turn to other content such as books, theater and film.

Will there be a court challenge? We've put this question to the ESA; they've told us that they are reviewing their options. For a variety of reasons, the main one being that the bill has no real teeth, it's entirely possible that the industry will just live with it.

E3 or Not E3 Debate Rages On

gamepolitics — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:39:35 -0500

VentureBeat's Dean Takahashi is the latest to weigh in on E3's future (or potential lack thereof).

Although of Dean's sources have already been cited here on GamePolitics, he did some quick polling of media and industry types yesterday and found some new voices ready to weigh in:

Joseph Olin, president of the Academy of Interactive Arts and Sciences offered a succinct perspective:

The irony is that we have a cultural revolution, with more people enjoying interactive entertainment than at any other time in our history; the video game industry has never been better. And you would think that we are going out of business here. We’ve lost the opportunity to stand up on our soap boxes and shout, look at me. The one thing the traditional E3 did was light the place up like a roman candle lit at both ends and focus the world’s media attention on us.

ECA boss Hal Halpin suggested combining E for All with E3 in a format more like that of the Tokyo Game Show. Meanwhile, game designer David Perry called the 2008 show an embarrassment and suggested opening it up to all game developers and publishers.

UPDATE: Meanwhile, The Game Reviews has E3 quotes from noted developer Denis Dyack:

I think this has definitely been better for the industry, simply because the amount of cost that was sunk into 2006 was not supportable. It could not have continued much longer. It was funny because I remember 2005 and 2006, and I was talking to people going, "I do not even know why we are doing this stuff anymore, delaying games by like two quarters to do these demos to get "Best in Show for E3" that really does not mean that much." And suddenly it crashed; it was like the Berlin Wall falling in 2006 after they announced it.

I do not really understand at some level why it all needs to be shown all at once. I would rather like to see it more like press junkets when stuff comes out, with a rotation for [press] to cover things in a really thorough and critical way. So I think this is better because it is smaller, but I think it would be better if it was not around at all. Nothing against ESA, but you know, I think, ’Oh well, there is another controversial thing I just said.’

Full Disclosure Dept: The ECA is the parent company of GamePolitics.

New Zealand Clears Morals Group to Petition for GTA IV Ban

gamepolitics — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:16:29 -0500

Nearly 90 days post-launch, Grand Theft Auto IV is still raising the ire of watchdog groups.

The New Zealand Herald reports that the Society for the Promotion of Community Standards has been granted permission to appeal GTA IV's R18 rating. The group notes on its website that the appeal will be made to New Zealand's Office of Film & Literature Classification.

The SPCS quotes from a decision issued yesterday by Brendan Boyle (left), New Zealand's Secretary of Internal Affairs:

I found no evidence in the [SPCS] application to suggest that it was vexatious... I then considered whether the application for leave was frivolous (trivial, needless or unfounded, or so untenable that it could not succeed) under the Guidelines... I found that the application for leave from the SPCS appeared to be tenable in that it could possibly succeed. The application was therefore not frivolous. It is also my view that the SPCS has established an arguable prima facie case for the application to be considered by the Board.

Since R18 is New Zealand's most stringent rating, a successful appeal by the SPCS would result in a national ban of the exceedingly popular game.

GP: Thanks to GamePolitics reader Solufien for the tip!

ACLU: NY Video Game Bill Passed by "Flawed Process"

gamepolitics — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 08:49:48 -0500

Rochester, New York public radio station WXXI reports that a representative of the New York Civil Liberties Union has termed the state's video game bill a "flawed process."

Bob Perry of the NYCLU told WXXI:

This bill was adopted in the last minutes of the legislative session, without hearings, without meaningful debate, without an opportunity for members of the public or industry to address the constitutional issues and the media technology issues implicated by the bill.

NY Metro has additional comments from Perry:

The legislation proposes an ambitious state system regulating the way video games are sold in retail stores and viewed at home based on content that the First Amendment protects from regulation.

Meanwhile, the Empire State News reports that NYCLU executive director Donna Lieberman (left) urged that the bill be vetoed:

New Yorkers do not need the state judging which video games are appropriate and which aren’t. Parents, not government committees, should be responsible for making those judgments. If the legislature wants to reduce youth violence, it should fund educational programs to teach students conflict resolution skills.

Bill sponsor Sen. Andrew Lanza (R) countered with:

This [law] does not prohibit the sale of video games based on ... content. This simply requires a labeling. And at the end of the day if a game is rated mature, or violent, this does not preclude or prohibit someone from selling it to a minor. I wish we could do that, but the First Amendment, I believe, protects against that.

Gov. David Paterson must decide by tomorrow whether to sign the bill into law. The measure, which would require that games be rated and console systems have parental controls built in, passed overwhelmingly in the state legislature.

It is unclear whether or not the video game industry will oppose the New York law if the Governor signs it.

Baltimore TV News Spanks Target on M-rated Game Sales

gamepolitics — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 07:03:40 -0500

Baltimore's ABC-2 conducted a ratings sting recently at local retail stores. In the first segment, the station said that Best Buy had a perfect record, turning away the station's 15-year-old secret shopper in all three of his attempts to purchase Devil May Cry 4, Bioshock and Call of Duty 4.

Target, however, did very poorly, not stopping the young man on any of his three tries at its stores. When informed of the chain's poor showing, Target rep Sonja Pothen told ABC-2:

While it's unfortunate to learn about the findings from this study, it sounds like we have an opportunity to encourage these stores to conduct training we've outlined regarding our video games sales policy.

ABC-2's results at GameStop and Wal-Mart are to be aired in a second segment.

GTA IV Car Named After Game Violence Researcher

gamepolitics — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:19:07 -0500

Last September game-hatin' attorney Jack Thompson claimed in a federal court filing that a corrupt attorney marked for assassination in Grand Theft Auto IV was him. But then, Thompson says a lot of things...

What seems more clear is that a hybrid car (left) available for jacking in GTA IV is named after a well-known game violence researcher, Dr. Karen Dill of North Carolina's Lenoir-Rhyne College.

As reported by the Chronicle of Higher Education:

The "Karin Dilettante" is a sporty hybrid sedan that appears in Grand Theft Auto IV, the latest installment in the famously violent and sexualized series of video games. "Chicks love electronic gadgets" is the slogan in fake ads for the car.

Ms. Dill says she couldn't believe that Rockstar Games, the maker of Grand Theft Auto, had taken the trouble to name a car for her: "I was kind of like, whoa, they actually do care about video-game research."

Dill, who has testified on game violence issues before Congress, apparently took the parody good-naturedly. Reportedly, she was simply relieved to find that she was not portrayed as one of the game's hookers.