Slashdot Mirror

http://www.idsa.com/

Just in case you don't remember. If you require a further reminder of awful things past:

http://www.mediamatic.net/article-200.5683.html&q_ theme=200.265

I found this interesting while I was working on a research project for school. According to the Interactive Digital Software Association, only 3.1% of those who buy computer games are under 18 years old, or 8.4% for video games. Most parents - 65% - think that these games are a positive part of their children's lives. And the most stunning stat is 96% of parents sometimes pay attention to the content of their child's games. These stats come from a pdf hosted by the Entertainment Software Association, but there is probably a similar version of the IDSA's site.

The situtation sounds generally positive to me, despite how many "kids" can supposedly buy violent games.

Surgeon General labels on their games. According to the Surgeon General, impact of media violence is very, very small. So small it doesn't really have an impact. Reasearchers in other countries conclude the same thing. See here

The problem, as usual, is that we "geeks" are almost ignored by politicians and lawmakers.

Sort of. The _bigger_ problem is that there exist consortiums of corporations which hate abandonware. Despite the size, organization, and good intentions of the abandonware community (check out this webring, for instance), there are stubborn corporations that will see practically no profit but want to retain their copyrights on silly-but-fun games forever. Slashdot has covered the IDSA's legal maneuverings in the past; Mobygames has an excellent feature that discusses some of the issues around the legal status of abandonware.

Nobody is going to pay absurdly inflated (probably price-fixed) shelf prices of $40 or so for old games. If the companies won't sell their copyrighted software, these games -- good games, like Civilization or Colonization or Wolfenstein 3D -- will gravitate towards an open trade on the Internet. They're often smaller than MP3's, and they're considerably more fulfilling. This kind of "copyright infringement" is usually ignored and not typically prosecuted; the situation's more or less fine as it is. But it's damned annoying trying to find a safe venue for sharing what is, in a way, cultural heritage. oh, and:

The problem, as usual, is that we "geeks" are almost ignored by politicians and lawmakers. It'd be interesting to see a future article describing why that's the case...but who really knows the answer?

IDSA=money

Thirty five percent of console game players and more than 43 percent of PC gamers are women, a slight increase over last year.

It's a tough time in the games industry, and anyone contemplating getting in should do the research thoroughly. While the risks are high, I believe game development could be refined into long term sustainable, profitable business by re-thinking the process of game creation.

Meanwhile, even government organizations like TEKES in Finland have started to seriously support the development of games and related technology and IGDA has already networked thousands of game developers together. Individual developers may fall, but game development is still a growing industry.

And we all heard about the return of shareware. PopCap's Bejeweled may not turn the heads of VCs with it's content, but a million copies sold is no peanuts.

Maybe if I finally updated my Palm games (/shameless plug) I could get rich quick, too. :-)

Jouni

"sounds like a cop out to me. Anime is so violent they put disclaimers on it when it shows on American TV."

You are comparing apples to oranges. Anime is a passive form of entertainment, and violence consumed passively is much different than killing someone in a interactive video game.

On the other hand, just look at the statistics for 2002:

Of all video game software sold in 2002:
* 55.7% were rated Everyone (E).
* 27.6% were rated Teen (T).
* 13.2% were rated Mature (M).
* In 2002, 80% of the top 20 best-selling console games were rated E or T, while 90% of the top 20 best-selling computer games were rated either E or T.
(source: IDSA)

So violent games are not necessarily the category which sells the most software, though the GBA makes up a significant portion of those figures.

What is important to consider is that Yamauchi is talking of the Gamecube and its direct console competitors, the PS2 and XBox. So, what was the top title sold for 2001?

So I believe there is truth to Yamauchi's statements with respect to the console market.

RIAA/MPAA Nightmare

add to that spa and idsa among others...

• Sid Meier's Pirates!
• Sid Meier's Colonization
• Covert Action
• Gunship
• Silent Service
• F-19 Stealth Fighter
• F-15 Strike Eagle
• CPU Bach

Yes. It's almost as if they expect that putting dmca@idsa.com on a popular website will lead to a lot of spam.

God, I'm childish.

I'm not familiar with their former actions, but this doesn't seem to be a good sign. Looking at their members, any questionable conduct could have very widespread effects. Don't wait until it's too late, let them know what you think now!

According to the IDSA the average age of PC gamers is 28. The average age for console gamers is closer to 20.

Closed, proprietary systems (I'm not sure about "rigid intellectual property control") aren't evil -- they're just one kind of software. Um... maybe it's a different matter for hardware. But even on Slashdot, most people will agree that there is a role for proprietary software to play in the industry. Console/PC gaming is one of these roles.

We have to remember that it is all related. The "values" of the video game industry are the same as those of the MPAA, RIAA, and Microsoft.

Some things are related. In the case of the gaming industry, there is still much more fragmentation as regards developers and publishers than there is in both the movie and music industries. Even though this is beginning to change, with companies like Electronic Arts becoming multi-billion $ behemoths, there is still a great deal of opportunity for small game developers. Additionally, there is no organization for the gaming industry that (as yet) performs a role similar to the all-encompassing power that the MPAA and RIAA hold over their respective industries. The largest gaming organization is the Interactive Digital Software Association, but few of its activities resemble the Gestapo tactics of the *AAs.

So, while some publishers' "values" may resemble those of certain hated industry organizations, many developers' and publishers' don't. Would anyone criticize Sid Meier, Warren Spector, Chris Taylor, Peter Molyneux, etc.? These guys are like the big stars of the music industry -- except they reap the benefits of their talent, and they get control over their projects. They aren't beholden to industry executives in the same way that virtually all music stars are. Hell, I shouldn't use "they get control"; it makes it sound like they receive their rights from someone else -- which is not the case. They have the freedom to choose their own destinies.

When you click on the following link in the page:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php3?date=2002-03 -04

You get:
http://www.idsa.com/piracy.html?date=2002-03-04

Cute huh?

-M

For bonus points, he might even stop it being linked in reference to the issue from this message.

Since this will now result in the total demise of copyright infringement, the movie, recording, and video game industries then immediately pay taxes on the hojillions of dollars they claim to be losing per year, at the prevailing highest corporate tax rate, with no writeoffs on this amount. These additional taxes should be a small price for industry to pay for the increased profits that would result from all that sudden demand now that their material isn't available for copying in digital form, now that general purpose computers would be outlawed.

Oh--you mean they aren't going to sell all that, because the people they claimed as having been costing them money wouldn't have bought the product anyway? That's OK--we can just sell the assets of the companies benefiting from the SSSCA to take care of the taxes, then.

Since this will now result in the total demise of copyright infringement, the movie, recording, and video game industries then immediately pay taxes on the hojillions of dollars they claim to be losing per year, at the prevailing highest corporate tax rate, with no writeoffs on this amount. These additional taxes should be a small price for industry to pay for the increased profits that would result from all that sudden demand now that their material isn't available for copying in digital form, now that general purpose computers would be outlawed.

Oh--you mean they aren't going to sell all that, because the people they claimed as having been costing them money wouldn't have bought the product anyway? That's OK--we can just sell the assets of the companies benefiting from the SSSCA to take care of the taxes, then.

Since this will now result in the total demise of copyright infringement, the movie, recording, and video game industries then immediately pay taxes on the hojillions of dollars they claim to be losing per year, at the prevailing highest corporate tax rate.

Oh--you mean they aren't going to sell all that, because the people they claimed as having been costing them money wouldn't have bought the product anyway? Guess we can just sell the industries to pay the taxes, then.

Remember their actions when doing your holiday shopping.

It amazes me how people can mix up two acronyms in a simple four acronym word.

During the IDSA rampage on emulation and ROM sites, many people for no reason whatsoever turned against a consultant IBM AS/400 community , or, Innovative Systems Design Association as opposed to the Interactive Digital Software association.

Dammit, I meant to sat the big bad IDSA. Whoops.

not certain about other emulators, but certainly spectrum emulation is a grey area. most software houses/copyright holders of old speccy games are happy to let their work into the public domain. some downright refuse (hello codemasters). there's a huge list of what's "free", what's restricted, and what's "in-the-air" on WOS.
one deciding point is that the machine itself can be considered public domain (amstrad released the roms to the public).
so there are two factors when it comes to emulation -- is the emulator allowed, and is playing the games allowed? guess we should ask the ISDA.

I don't see how this news is astonishing and breakthrough...our emulation archive has Boycott Advance builds as far back as February...not to mention none of the released GBA emulators can do anything other than play demos.

Furthermore, the authors didn't just guess how it works...the schematics and such were leaked long, long ago. Since the Japanese release, emulators have improved, but since the US release hasn't happened yet, they're still not capable of any decent commercial emulation.

Now, since GBA emulation received such huge mainstream attention via /., I wouldn't be surprised if the IDSA and/or Nintendo go after it and try to pull some nonsense with the DMCA (probably won't work because it wasn't reverse engineered...the details were released) or contract out some evil h4x0r to send an EMP into the authors' houses. Whether they succeed or not, they still will have achieved their goal by implanting the thought in everyones' mind...."GBA emulation is bad mmm'kay, and we can get sued".

The more important people in "the scene" tend to ask that you use emulation to relive old experiences on systems that are no longer being developed or have long been broken...so...if you're insistant upon GBA emulation, use the "try before you buy" method. If you like it, Nintendo deserves your money.

I fail to see what you have against the Defense Contract Management Agency. Dirty bastards, managing defense contracts!


oh wait, you're talking about the DMCA. It always seems to me that people mix up acronyms when talking about organizations and law. People seemed to have a grudge against the IBM AS/400 community for going on a rampage against emulation and ROM sites when it was actually The Interactive Digital Software Association that was terrorizing the emulation community.

I don't mean to be grammar police, but please get your acronyms straight.

IDSA seems to have a monopoly on educating the government about "strong intellectual property rights." Why can't the Free Software movement participate in such training, and FSF lawyers ver the training materials? If we don't educate people, the other side will!

From IDSA's site:

IDSA anti-piracy efforts include: direct investigation and enforcement actions around the world and on-line, working closely with government agencies such as United States Trade Representative, the United States Customs Service, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and foreign government officials, training and educating customs agents and law enforcement officers in the United States and around the world.

The IDSA piracy program has three main components: policy work, education and enforcement. Our policy work focuses on domestic and foreign legal and regulatory issues affecting member's intellectual property rights and the market access barriers that member companies face when trying to enter a foreign market. In the education area, we have developed training materials for U.S. Custom and law enforcement personnel and do several training sessions around the country every month. In addition, IDSA staff educates foreign visitors on our industry and the importance of strong Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) protection around the world. This effort includes training foreign custom agents to identify pirate entertainment software, working with foreign prosecutors on running raids and prepare cases, and training judges on IPR. Finally, the association runs an anti-piracy enforcement program in selected foreign markets, as well as domestic piracy in the U.S., through the Internet, computer shows, etc. This program is completely funded by membership dues and is open to all IDSA member companies.

Isn't it OK to copy games that are no longer distributed in the stores or commercially exploited?

No, the current availability of a game in stores is irrelevant to its copyright status. Unlike trademarks, copyrights are not considered abandoned if they are no longer enforced. Copyrights do not enter the public domain just because they are no longer commercially exploited or widely available. Therefore, the copyrights of games are valid even if the games are not found on store shelves, and copying or distributing those games is a copyright infringement. (From http://www.idsa.com/piracy.html)
What exactly are the IDSA doing wrong here? People should write to the member companies and ask them to change their corporate policies, not flame the ISDA. The companies signed up because they didn't want their IP put on the web for download.. you're allowed to complain to them but you can't just ignore them because you don't like what they have to say. The ISDA are doing what they're paid to do. They hit high profile sites because it is easy, low risk (they clearly have legal right whatever the moral viewpoint) and sends a message. If they let these high profile sites go it whould imply acceptace of copyright devalument after, say, 6 years or so. The members don't want that.

I know people here get very worked up about GPL violations, well these guys appear to be engaged in wholesale licence violation. Its not as if these companies aren't trading anymore or that these games have no value. Companies like Namco still make good money from 20yr old games being sold today. Maybe EA want to put Gunship in thier next flight sim as a secret sub-game in the air traffic control system computer (Day of the tenticle anyone?). These guys were giving Gunship away, which devalues such a promotion.

Am I missing something or is this whole "Abandonware" tag being abused. Who says these games are Abandoned? Doesn't that happen when the Publisher/whoever formally Abandons it, or changes the licence or the copyright expires? Maybe if they go bankrupt (although such rights usually find a buyer even then). There are examples of companies releasing old IP because they don't need it, think its good PR, had a fit of humanity etc.. but this site doesn't look like a repository of that to me.

I don't see the IDSA overstepping any marks here. This one of the roles they exist to carry out. Complaining to the members makes sense. If you alert them to a market for old games them may make them a $1 dload...

Isn't it OK to copy games that are no longer distributed in the stores or commercially exploited?

No, the current availability of a game in stores is irrelevant to its copyright status. Unlike trademarks, copyrights are not considered abandoned if they are no longer enforced. Copyrights do not enter the public domain just because they are no longer commercially exploited or widely available. Therefore, the copyrights of games are valid even if the games are not found on store shelves, and copying or distributing those games is a copyright infringement. (From http://www.idsa.com/piracy.html)
What exactly are the IDSA doing wrong here? People should write to the member companies and ask them to change their corporate policies, not flame the ISDA. The companies signed up because they didn't want their IP put on the web for download.. you're allowed to complain to them but you can't just ignore them because you don't like what they have to say. The ISDA are doing what they're paid to do. They hit high profile sites because it is easy, low risk (they clearly have legal right whatever the moral viewpoint) and sends a message. If they let these high profile sites go it whould imply acceptace of copyright devalument after, say, 6 years or so. The members don't want that.

I know people here get very worked up about GPL violations, well these guys appear to be engaged in wholesale licence violation. Its not as if these companies aren't trading anymore or that these games have no value. Companies like Namco still make good money from 20yr old games being sold today. Maybe EA want to put Gunship in thier next flight sim as a secret sub-game in the air traffic control system computer (Day of the tenticle anyone?). These guys were giving Gunship away, which devalues such a promotion.

Am I missing something or is this whole "Abandonware" tag being abused. Who says these games are Abandoned? Doesn't that happen when the Publisher/whoever formally Abandons it, or changes the licence or the copyright expires? Maybe if they go bankrupt (although such rights usually find a buyer even then). There are examples of companies releasing old IP because they don't need it, think its good PR, had a fit of humanity etc.. but this site doesn't look like a repository of that to me.

I don't see the IDSA overstepping any marks here. This one of the roles they exist to carry out. Complaining to the members makes sense. If you alert them to a market for old games them may make them a $1 dload...

Unfortunately, no. On the IDSA's (with whose actions and legal opinions I certainly do not agree) anti-piracy page they state it thus (in their FAQ):

"Haven't the copyrights for old games (like Atari & Commodore) expired?

U.S. copyright laws state that copyrights owned by corporations are valid for 75 years [emphasis mine] from the date of first publication. Because video & computer games have been around for less than three decades, the copyrights of all video and computer programs will not expire for many decades to come."

Since there are a lot of questions about the statistics, I will restate where I got them from (they are stated at the bottom of the article):

IDSA -- http://www.idsa.com/releases/consumer.ht ml

Quote:

According to the IDSA's fourth annual Video and PC Game Industry Trends Survey, more women are playing games than ever. Thirty five percent of console game players and more than 43 percent of PC gamers are women, a slight increase over last year.

They had other statistics for who buys the games. These were the statistics for who plays them.