Not All ESA Members Believe In SOPA

[OldNewNewOld]

Just to clarify to those who ask them self why "no response" is considered as "For".

ESA is supporting SOPA. If you're part of ESA and you don't say you're against SOPA, that means you are for it.
If they weren't a part of ESA, I wouldn't trust the list because "no respones" is no response. But since they are part of something that supports SOPA, no response means "We trust ESA to chose what's best and we support them".

 

[-|-]

ESA is supporting SOPA. If you're part of ESA and you don't say you're against SOPA, that means you are for it.

No it doesn't.

 

[tharglet]

It's giving them the power to shut down websites that could infringe on copyright laws. The entire website... Youtube, google, other big name sites that I can't seem to think of off the top of my head (too sleepy) can just be shut down.

If this was to happen, then the big businesses would probably remove their presence from the US, so the US has limited powers to what they can do.
Very much doubt the law's gonna get through in the state it's in at this stage.
Would be kinda interesting to me, if it make the EU a much better place to be in terms of internet service, livin' in the UK an' all.

 

[GeorgW]

Oh, I love 38 studios. I'm really excited for Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning, and now this. I've placed my hope correctly, it would seem.
I find the amount of companies dodging the question worrying, it's either cowardice, nonchalance or Joystiq didn't give them enough time. But still, how long could it take to reply a simple yes or no? How long have SEGA been working on it?
The ESA is a powerful force and I understand why no one has left it over this, but they have every right to ask/force the ESA's official stance to change. It's a shame that the ESA's reputation will forever be lost, it used to do a lot of good.

 

[RvLeshrac]

Because SOPA fundamentally destroys the way business is done on the internet,

In your opinion - not everyone agrees. I do agree with you stance, but I accept that other people do not for whatever reason they have.

..they either support it or leave the ESA. There is no logical or business reason for any of these companies to remain members of the ESA in the face of the ESA's support for SOPA, unless they believe that SOPA should pass and the provisions of SOPA be exercised.

Or they just don't have an opinion on it. This is not a "if you're not with us you must be against us" issue. Especially for corporations which are amoral (note - not immoral) and will just work within whatever legislative framework exists.

The only people who don't believe this destroys the fundamental nature of the internet are those who don't understand and work with it. There is *universal* revulsion for SOPA amongst those who manage DNS. At the end of the day, pirates *do not care*. There are dozens of methods for bypassing SOPA's enforcement measures. The people who *do* care are the people who run charity gaming events, make LP or machinima videos, review gaming products, or simply reference another company's work in their own title.

SOPA will destroy most of these things, and make those it doesn't destroy *very* risky for site-owners.

I find it interesting that you say "...will just work within whatever legislative framework exists exists..." when many of these companies spent quite a lot of their own money lobbying against government-mandated ratings in the 80s and 90s.

 

[RvLeshrac]

It's giving them the power to shut down websites that could infringe on copyright laws. The entire website... Youtube, google, other big name sites that I can't seem to think of off the top of my head (too sleepy) can just be shut down.

If this was to happen, then the big businesses would probably remove their presence from the US, so the US has limited powers to what they can do.
Very much doubt the law's gonna get through in the state it's in at this stage.
Would be kinda interesting to me, if it make the EU a much better place to be in terms of internet service, livin' in the UK an' all.

If the law passes, it only applies to foreign-operated sites. The only companies that will be safe from it are American-operated.

You're free to argue that it can't affect foreign sites, but you're wrong. We update root servers in the US, that change propagates to the rest of the world, and the site becomes inaccessible to most people. World-wide.

 

[Ruwrak]

"We don't have an individual statement on this, but encourage you to seek statement from the ESA on the matter."

We are still building concensus commander Shepherd?
If this isn't a hivemind statement, I know nothing else that -is-

 

[-|-]

The only people who don't believe this destroys the fundamental nature of the internet are those who don't understand and work with it. There is *universal* revulsion for SOPA amongst those who manage DNS. At the end of the day, pirates *do not care*. There are dozens of methods for bypassing SOPA's enforcement measures. The people who *do* care are the people who run charity gaming events, make LP or machinima videos, review gaming products, or simply reference another company's work in their own title.

SOPA will destroy most of these things, and make those it doesn't destroy *very* risky for site-owners.

I find it interesting that you say "...will just work within whatever legislative framework exists exists..." when many of these companies spent quite a lot of their own money lobbying against government-mandated ratings in the 80s and 90s.

You are preaching to the choir on the ills of SOPA. I am in complete agreement with you that it's bad.

It's just that I disagree that not stating a position and remaining in ESA implies support and I disagree that not supporting SOPA means that a company needs to leave ESA.

(and yes companies lobby for things they want, but on things they have no position, or won't, in their opinion, make a difference to their bottom line then why should they care. From a PR perspective it's probably best for them to stay out of politics rather than become embroiled in it)

 

[HentMas]

I love how all the companies that are against SOPA actually gave a clear and well thought out response and 98% of the companies that are For SOPA chose to not respond at all and the other 2% (Capcom) are total nit wits about it.

You do realize 'for' in this case meant 'didn't respond' and was just supposition on Joystiq's part, right? At least for the most part, there were a few that were actually for it.

I didn't realize abstaining meant you for something.

Christ, it's like the Iraq war logic all over again, but I guess it's ok if you aren't a Republican and you do it, eh?

"You don't have an opinion? I GUESS THAT MAKES YOU A FREEDOM HATING HIPPY TERRORIST!"

what you have to understand here is that they are not saying "NO" but the ESA as a whole is saying "YES" that means the ESA is taking part for the MAYORITY of the members, which means that whoever hasn´t said "We are against it" is either letting ESA decide for them (like SLANG or THQ) or leaving the discussion to ESA instead of themselves, to be more precise, they dont want to be pointed out as "supporters" because they dont like the idea of being singled out on the issue, its easyer to stay silent than to give their oppinion on the matter, but the fact that ESA is "for" means almost all of them are "for" SOPA

your example is invalid, because if he is not a part of a group that says "i am a freedom hating hippy terrorist" then he can have no oppinion on the matter, but if he is part of such group, then he has already made his choise on being a "freedom hating hippy terrorist"

what is telling is how companies that are "against" are still with ESA, but one haves to take into account the things they might lose if they get out of the group (like the license to some of their oldest IP´s) so i cant condemn the ones that say "we are against" and remain within the ESA.

 

[newwiseman]

Well I wasn't planning on buying anything from them anyway, especially Square.

 

[Strazdas]

THQ, im so dissapointed in you.
microsoft plays both sides as always. they are fighting piracy and then state that piracy is what made them popular in asia. now they play both sides in this conflict, regardless of outcome - they end up a winner.
i wont start blaming those with no response yet, for it is possible they they are against it. i am a nvidia fanboy and would definitely not like to see then going for it, but i can see how for them its only a bonus as they dont really do anything on the internet. if this turns out to be true i guess ill be buying my first radeon card.
what i hate the most of people who stated that we should ask ESA. they have no opinion and let others tag thier names along.

 

[K_Dub]

Man, fuck all these companies who don't have the common sense and foresight to see that this bill is going to do massive amount of damage to the online job market! I suppose we can only hope that this bill is never passed as is, cuz at this point, it seems very few game companies will be changing their positions on this subject!

 

[noahpocalypse]

Ask Bungie, I wonder what they'd say.

 

[MorphingDragon]

Against companies should put their money where their mouth is. By staying with the ESA they support their Decisions.