ESA Speaks Vaguely About SOPA Support

vansau

Mortician of Love
May 25, 2010
6,107
0
0
ESA Speaks Vaguely About SOPA Support



Even though SOPA is no more, the ESA isn't apologizing for supporting it.

The <a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/115025-ESA-Refuses-To-Pull-SOPA-Support>ESA's support of the widely-hated Stop Online Piracy Act has been quite a source of controversy for the past few weeks. Things really started to go nuts over the past few days, with many folks <a href=http://www.change.org/petitions/stop-the-esa-petition-and-boycott-e3>petitioning gave developers and news groups to boycot E3. Now that SOPA seems to finally, truly,<a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/115384-SOPA-Postponed-Indefinitely> be dead in the water (at least for now), the ESA has issued a statement about the bill, but it's not exactly saying that the legislation was a bad idea.

Here's the statement in full:

"From the beginning, ESA has been committed to the passage of balanced legislation to address the illegal theft of intellectual property found on foreign rogue sites. Although the need to address this pervasive threat to our industry's creative investment remains, concerns have been expressed about unintended consequences stemming from the current legislative proposals. Accordingly, we call upon Congress, the Obama Administration, and stakeholders to refocus their energies on producing a solution that effectively balances both creative and technology interests. As an industry of innovators and creators, we understand the importance of both technological innovation and content protection and are committed to working with all parties to encourage a balanced solution."

While it may be tempting to read this as the ESA dropping support of SOPA, that's not the case. This statement was clearly worded so it can work with whatever direction the political winds are blowing. The ESA is taking the same sort of stance that SOPA author Lamar Smith is, essentially saying "I won't admit I was wrong, but I recognize that my idea will not go forward as is."

Both the ESA and its individual members have received a high amount of criticism from all sides over the organization's stance on SOPA, as well as how <a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/115271-ESA-Spends-Big-Bucks-on-PIPA-Related-Lobbying>it spent a lot of money to support PIPA. Even <a href=http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2012/01/20>Penny Arcade weighed in on the matter, calling out both the ESA for its support and Electronic Arts for its fence-straddling on the issue. While some members have <a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/115100-Not-All-ESA-Members-Believe-In-SOPA>gone on record to stand against the legislation, many developers and publishers have tacitly given approval of the ESA's support by saying nothing at all.

So, for right now, the ESA is done supporting SOPA (since, you know, that bill isn't moving forward), but it looks like it'll probably get behind a similar piece of legislation if when someone else proposes it in the future.

On a related note: Go read <a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/comics/critical-miss/9356-Drop-The-SOPA>today's Critical Miss. You probably need a laugh after this story.





Permalink
 

RedEyesBlackGamer

The Killjoy Detective returns!
Jan 23, 2011
4,701
0
0
In other words,
They only regret that they wasted money and that the bills probably aren't going to pass.
 

Spud of Doom

New member
Feb 24, 2011
349
0
0
Hmm yes. But we all knew they support copyright enforcement legislation in general, so this is no surprise. We are all glad that they have dropped this, because it means people can go to E3 now.
 

vansau

Mortician of Love
May 25, 2010
6,107
0
0
Spud of Doom said:
Hmm yes. But we all knew they support copyright enforcement legislation in general, so this is no surprise. We are all glad that they have dropped this, because it means people can go to E3 now.
E3 was still going to happen, and people were still going to cover it. The only way that the show could have failed would have been if ESA members had pulled themselves from the show and given newsgroups nothing to cover.
 

Spud of Doom

New member
Feb 24, 2011
349
0
0
vansau said:
Spud of Doom said:
Hmm yes. But we all knew they support copyright enforcement legislation in general, so this is no surprise. We are all glad that they have dropped this, because it means people can go to E3 now.
E3 was still going to happen, and people were still going to cover it. The only way that the show could have failed would have been if ESA members had pulled themselves from the show and given newsgroups nothing to cover.
Yes, I'm aware of this. I never meant to say that the show would have failed, I just mean that now people don't feel like they have a moral obligation to boycott the biggest gaming news event.
 
Apr 28, 2008
14,634
0
0
So, you support it completely, and after it's all beaten, you kind of sort of say you didn't support it that much?

Yeah, no. Not falling for this shit.
 

Zen Toombs

New member
Nov 7, 2011
2,105
0
0
Zachary Amaranth said:
We're not supporting this ostensibly dead legislation anymore!
Well said.

OT: [sarcasm]Thank you ESA for being completely forthright with your opinions and thoughts! I really appreciate your honesty.[/sarcasm]
 
Feb 13, 2008
19,430
0
0
I know this will probably be thrown back in my face but...

If ESA represent "us", then why are they deciding for "us"?

If Games Publishers, Players, Journalists, Programmers, Artists, Developers and Producers are all part of the ESA, why wasn't something as huge as that put up for referendum?

I'm reasonably sure that 2/3rds, at least, of our group do not want SOPA or PIPA in their current form - and made it quite clear BEFORE they were dropped.

Who does ESA answer to? Because it seems to just be ESA.

And if that's the case, why are publishers supporting them? I can't see that they would pay EA etc. enough to support a independent body.

Can we not, as a group, boycott ESA until they agree to act as our delegated representatives, and not just as profit chasers?
 

Noble_Lance

New member
Sep 4, 2011
125
0
0
I agree that something does need to be done with places that do handle illegal downloads and such. But their is a difference between targeted attacks and scorched earth tactics.
 

vansau

Mortician of Love
May 25, 2010
6,107
0
0
The_root_of_all_evil said:
I know this will probably be thrown back in my face but...

If ESA represent "us", then why are they deciding for "us"?

If Games Publishers, Players, Journalists, Programmers, Artists, Developers and Producers are all part of the ESA, why wasn't something as huge as that put up for referendum?

I'm reasonably sure that 2/3rds, at least, of our group do not want SOPA or PIPA in their current form - and made it quite clear BEFORE they were dropped.

Who does ESA answer to? Because it seems to just be ESA.

And if that's the case, why are publishers supporting them? I can't see that they would pay EA etc. enough to support a independent body.

Can we not, as a group, boycott ESA until they agree to act as our delegated representatives, and not just as profit chasers?
The ESA is only game developers and publishers. Hate to break it to you, but most of "us" aren't members.
 
Feb 13, 2008
19,430
0
0
vansau said:
The ESA is only game developers and publishers. Hate to break it to you, but most of "us" aren't members.
OK then, given condemnation of it by numerous developers/publishers...same question? I can understand EA/Blizzard/UbiSoft being for it; but Valve, Mojang, Team Meat, Media Molecule...

Granted this is probably going to go straight back to "because they can", but why are they being allowed to be in this position - directly breaking their own code of conduct? ("To protect gaming from overreaching(?) legislation")
 

DrOswald

New member
Apr 22, 2011
1,443
0
0
I say we still do whatever it takes to burn the ESA to the ground. They are just going to try to pull something like this again.
 

vansau

Mortician of Love
May 25, 2010
6,107
0
0
The_root_of_all_evil said:
vansau said:
The ESA is only game developers and publishers. Hate to break it to you, but most of "us" aren't members.
OK then, given condemnation of it by numerous developers/publishers...same question? I can understand EA/Blizzard/UbiSoft being for it; but Valve, Mojang, Team Meat, Media Molecule...

Granted this is probably going to go straight back to "because they can", but why are they being allowed to be in this position - directly breaking their own code of conduct? ("To protect gaming from overreaching(?) legislation")
...

OK, do me a favor. Go read the Wikipedia page and look at its membership list [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entertainment_Software_Association]. Come back here and then we'll start over.
 
Feb 13, 2008
19,430
0
0
vansau said:
OK, do me a favor. Go read the Wikipedia page and look at its membership list [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entertainment_Software_Association]. Come back here and then we'll start over.
This bit?

ESA's programs include:

Presenting the annual Electronic Entertainment Expo (E3 Media and Business Summit, currently the Electronic Entertainment Expo)
Supporting the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB)
Combating copyright infringement of software
Combating governmentally imposed video game censorship and regulation
But I think you're trying to point out the membership list - Then basically they're just a representative of a group of interested companies - who isn't doing what they need to.

So...original question...are they just a lobbying shield for the companies still involved? Because that seems to be all they're working towards.
 

SilverUchiha

New member
Dec 25, 2008
1,604
0
0
RedEyesBlackGamer said:
In other words,
They only regret that they wasted money and that the bills probably aren't going to pass.
http://shadbase.com/dr-claw/

I honestly couldn't not respond to your video.

OT: So, I think we, as a community, should still boycott ESA's events (E3) and ignore them completely. To have only boycotted for this event means nothing if we stop after they released a pathetic statement like that. I say let them fade into obscurity and we'll find a newer, better voice to represent the gaming community.
 

Formica Archonis

Anonymous Source
Nov 13, 2009
2,312
0
0
The_root_of_all_evil said:
So...original question...are they just a lobbying shield for the companies still involved? Because that seems to be all they're working towards.
Were they ever anything but that? They're built in the image of the RIAA and MPAA and funded by many of the same entities.
 

kebab4you

New member
Jan 3, 2010
1,451
0
0
Weird that I haven't seen them say anything about ACTA seeing how it´s another one of these horrific bills, that the ESA would love to support <-<
 

ShaneGunWolf

New member
Jul 6, 2011
78
0
0
DrOswald said:
I say we still do whatever it takes to burn the ESA to the ground. They are just going to try to pull something like this again.
I agree. These people are just bad. Bad, bad, BAD.