Researchers find no link between violent games and violent behavior

While not strictly related to the law, I found it interesting that after conducting a study, researchers at Texas A+M have found no link between violent video games and violent behavior. There have been many lawsuits trying to pin violent behavior on the influence of video games, and well, I am tired of it. I have played video games my whole life, kicking the crap out of virtual competitors, human and computer alike, but I am one of the least violent people I know. I've never even been in a fight.

No link between violent behavior and violent games: eat your heart out Jack Thompson

Stalled Indiana VG Legislation moves to State Senate

After a recommendation from Indiana's Committee on Economic Development and Technology, the State Senate of Indiana will consider legislation aimed at restricting the sale of M (mature) and AO (adults only) rated games to minors. Apparently, committee members were shown an inflammatory video depicting characters being urinated on and then set ablaze and gunning people down in church.

Indiana's Senate recommends to itself to adopt new legislation

Now that the ESRB will have full-time game raters, the whole process is becoming more streamlined. I suppose the end result of ratings is regulation, and seeing as how I am no longer a minor, I do not think legislation like this is a bad thing. Have I turned to the dark side?

Blizzard Sues WoW Glider

Blizzard has initiated action action against MDY Industries, claiming its manufacture of the WoW Glider circumvents copyright protections, allows cheating, encourages copyright infringement, violates the EULA, and a host of other charges. For those unfamiliar, WoW Glider is a bot program - turn it on and your character will run around leveling up and gathering loot 24/7. Markee Dragon, a biggie in these worlds (featured in Play Money), makes some futile arguments as to why this is not breaking the law, blah, blah, blah, but I agree with the boys at Kotaku that not only does this violate the EULA, it is straight cheating. Then again, having been stuck killing 1,000 Waterfall Warbolgs, it is no mystery to me why a player wouldn't just pay $25 to have a computer do it for you. Strange that you would pay to have a computer play a game for you...very strange.

Blizzard sues WoW Glider maker

Here are the case's Answers and Counterclaims, along with some exhibits

Play Money Review

I just spent this weekend reading Julian Dibbell's Play Money: Or, How I Quit My Job and Made Millions Trading Virtual Loot. Needless to say, I loved it. It tracks Julian's journey to make as much money trading virtual property online in one year as he did during his most financially successful year as a writer. After some preliminary interviews with big-time money makers in Ultima Online (talking 'bout six figures), Dibbell takes the plunge, deciding to dedicate himself full-time to playing UO. He hits some snags along the way and the learning curve for him is sharp, but before long, his feet are wet in the industry and he is making a name for himself among the hardcore vendors in UO. He starts out trying to sell miner's maps for a new virtual region that had recently opened, but realizes that he cannot make a living doing such nonsense, and eventually gets hired to run items for a more big time dealer. He steadily moves up the chain, encountering more of these vendors, whose activities and practices are at best unsavory and at worst straight cheating. He meets bot farmers: players who had written computer programs to play UO constantly, doing mindless tasks that generate huge amounts of virtual gold that can be sold for real money. At first, Dibbell rejects these "cheaters," wanting to make an honest living. These sentiments fade though as he realizes that he never really knows where all of the virtual loot he deals in comes from: some of it is from farmers, some of it from players who steal from other players, some of it from good old-fashioned gamers. After a failed venture with a Chinese Sweatshop (he paid a working wage of $1.50/hour, but now this is down to around $.25/hour), Dibbell cares not where he gets his goods and begins distributing the loot the farmers gather. In the end, his experiment comes down to generating $4,500 in a single month. See comments for Dibbell's final cash total.

I found the most interesting aspects of the book to be the nuts and bolts of how these virtual fencers actually operated and the social structures required to run what are essentially virtual rackets. One consortium of supporters in the book actually call themselves the UO Cartel. While their practices are not expressly illegal, monitors from the UO maker, called GMs, patrol the land deleting accounts of players that do not play by the rules (i.e. the farmers with automated programs). Game developers thus far have not condoned the practices of virtual fencers like Mr. Dibbell and they actively work to stop them (recently, Sony opened two servers of its MMORPG EverQuest II to a totally regulated market where customers can purchase any item they want in the game from Sony for real cash; Check it. Most the scams involves searching for quirks in the game that allow the purchase of one item for say 3 gold pieces, a totally midless task of converting the item from A to B, as in turning a chicken into a cooked chicken, and reselling the cooked chicken for 6 gold pieces. Repeat 30 times a minute, 24 hours a day, and before long, stashes of virtual loot. Bam.

Spliced between these gameplay experiences are some musings on the seeming indistinguishability of work from play in these games. I think the book illustrates that if you consume your life with any endeavor, even games, you will work to feel the accomplishment of expertise. In MMORPGs, people do different works for different expertise. Average players will spend hours working toward building their character, doing tasks in the hope of unlocking some virtual prestige, or opening up a previously inaccessible dungeon. Virtual vendors take it to a whole new level: they do not so much play as observe their markets, patiently waiting for good deals, and work the system when the right opportunity comes around. Dibbell was willing to dedicate himself, not only to vending virtual goods, but the larger academic project of rooting around in this largely unknown territory --> he put in the effort and was rewarded with expertise.

Overall, the book was an enjoyable read and I recommend it for anyone who has ever lived, even temporarily, in one of these worlds. My WoW character Nightstalker, a night elf hunter, had to be shelved after I hit level 40 precisely because playing felt much more like a grind than play (I was only halfway time-wise to the maximum level of 60); I still miss my pet cat, Peepers.

Video Games Standards Commission

In an article on Next Generation, Eric-Jon Rossel Waugh discusses the possibility of a single console in the future, ushered in to the market by cooperation among the forces that be. I found the article to be a whole lotta wishful thinking, especially when viewed from the business side of things. He envisions a landscape where all developers, big and small, give input into defining standards. He believes the biggest hurdle yet is that video games have yet to "come into their own." What does that mean? There is really only one way to watch TV or one way to watch a DVD and the different technologies employed utilize different delivery systems. But there are so many ways to play video games depending on the hardware, controllers, and console medium (through the Computer or TV). Personally, I think standardization almost sounds like a good idea, but in the end would lead to less innovation in the market.

I say negative on the Video Games Standards Commission: what do you think?

From what little I know about the IEEE, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, which handles standards in the electronics industry, their system functions well enough but leads to some thorny patent issues. Most specifically, whenever a standard is up for review, there are always competing members with competing patents who want their technology to become the standard. However part of the trade-off when a technology is selected for the standard, the patent holders must give up rights to sue for patent infringement. I wonder who this would be the biggest problem for? Sony, Microsoft, or perhaps a largest game patent owner, Nintendo?

Piracy? Blame Canada

The seven-member International Intellectual Property Association, whose members include the ESA, MPAA, and RIAA, have put Canada on a list of countries with the worst international copyright enforcement. Canada is a leading exporter of bootlegged films and mod chips. I guess the piracy has risen "to such an extent as to prejudicially affect the owner of the copyright." (See Japan Bans Export of Pirated material) So when is Canada going to start enforcing?

Blame Canada, Blame Canada, their beady little eyes have packed their heads so full of lies, Blame Canada

IIPA claims that software piracy had cost copyright holders $12.3 billion last year, while music piracy affected US companies to the tune of $2.4 billion. Ouch!

Ubisoft plans to produce 3 new IPs every 3 years

Ubisoft's vice president of publishing, Jay Cohen, stated that his company sees the development of their business in IP. Correctly pointing out that licensed works can be revoked or ended with the developer being left with nothing, he believes that his company's control of their IP assets is essential.

IP is the horizon

This great news for an aspiring lawyer such as myself. But, I do think Mr. Cohen should check a few postings ago under the Games people buy. Some of the top 100 games of last year:

1. Madden
2. Cars
99. Ubisoft's Rayman

So yes, I think Ubisoft should definitely focus on the IP.