PC Gaming Alliance Remains 'Cautiously Optimistic' On SOPA
from the mostly-neutral dept
With the news that the ESA supports SOPA and more and more gaming companies and related organizations coming out with their stances on the topic, I have been reaching out to some organizations that have yet to make a public stance on SOPA. One of these organizations is the PC Gaming Alliance, a trade group dedicated to building up the PC gaming market. With all the piracy that many companies complain about and their efforts to stop it using DRM, online authentication and other forms of validating a legit game, SOPA must seem like a godsend. However, the PCGA states that it is “mostly neutral” on SOPA and PIPA. I was asked to quote its whole statement to avoid being taken out of context, so here it is in its entirety.
Our Stance: The PC Gaming Alliance’s position on these two pieces of legislation is MOSTLY neutral, on both pieces of legislation in their current iterations for several reasons:
1) These are both highly contentious forms of legislation; and it’s simply too early to tell what the true impacts & implications are really going to be.
2) Several PCGA members belong to other organizations that either are in support of, or opposed to both or either Acts.
3) These Acts are, for the most part, in their infancy. Several indicators point towards both, or either, of them being overturned, being heavily modified from their current instantiation, or even outright not manifesting at all. This makes it difficult at best to endorse either of the Acts in their current forms.
Our Position Statement: The PC Gaming Alliance is always in strong support of protecting Intellectual Property, reducing counterfeit goods, and taking steps towards reducing or eliminating all forms of Piracy. To that end; we’re remaining cautiously optimistic that these 2 pieces of legislation will accomplish the goals they’re trying to tackle in way that doesn’t result in encroaching on other freedoms, or create additional grievances for the consumers and developers they’re designed to protect. The PCGA will continue to closely monitor developments on these two pieces of legislation and we’ll likely take a more proactive stance based on the outcomes and desires of the majority of our members that we represent in the near future.
Matt Ployhar
(Pres. PC Gaming Alliance)
As Matt pointed out in points numbers one and three, with all the controversy over SOPA and PIPA and their questionable fate in both the House and Senate, this is probably the best stance (short of out right rejecting them both) that any interested party could take. I am glad to see them recognize that fact and that they are willing to stand by it. While Lamar Smith seems confident in SOPA’s passage and the perceived lack of opposition, the reality is that SOPA is far from a done deal.
As for point two, this is a wholly different take from the ESA. The ESA has taken the liberty of supporting SOPA for all its members, regardless of the individual member’s positions. If we look at the members of the PCGA, we can see that we already have a small variety of outlooks on the legislation. For one, we have Capcom that is happy following the ESA’s lead. We have also learned that Epic rejects SOPA in its current form and 38 Studios does as well. So with this early conflict of opinions, it is probably best that the PCGA does not take a firm stance just yet.
However, I would take to task the idea that SOPA and PIPA are salvageable and are anything resembling laws that do what the PCGA hopes they will while not encroaching on anyone’s freedoms. Even the OPEN act that has been introduced as an alternative has its own problems. I remain firm in my ideal that any problem with piracy is: First, a business model problem. Companies should do all they can do to mitigate piracy by providing the level of service their customers desire. Valve has shown this is possible and still make a profit. Second, a connection problem. Many customers feel disconnected from the developers of the games they make. If SOPA passes, that disconnect will only become worse as fans of games would be unsure of just how they can express their enjoyment of and excitement for games without being targeted under SOPA’s enforcement provisions. Let’s hope that more companies take such a “cautiously optimistic” point of view on SOPA while still remaining open to the idea that it may not be the solution they truly need.
Filed Under: pipa, protect ip, sopa, video games
Companies: pcga
Comments on “PC Gaming Alliance Remains 'Cautiously Optimistic' On SOPA”
The gaming industry is not exempt from the wild ranting of lunatics. Remember good old Jack Thompson? If the opportunity were presented, he just might make some claims of infringement in order to further his agenda.
Stop buying new releases of video games. These game companies are making more money than Hollywood movies. One of the few businesses that are doing better than ever in this crappy economy. Yet they support SOPA to the full extent.
Stop buying new released games! For consoles and PC! Until these game cartels publicly denounce their support for both PIPA and SOPA. Stop buying new releases!!
that should be easy, Steve..
..seeing as how no one has made a decent video game in about 15 years.
Re: that should be easy, Steve..
Did they ever?
Re: that should be easy, Steve..
“..seeing as how no one has made a decent video game in about 15 years”
And this fact is reflected in their sales figures, right?
I agree with number three.
For one, this isn’t the first time the entertainment industry has pulled a stunt like this. Similar opposition was faced when the first Mp3 players came into being, the VCR was invented, even the radio was met with attempts to forcibly legislate it.
Personally, with all the outcry against these I believe Mr. Smith is in for a rude awakening when he returns to DC come the end of January.
“it’s simply too early to tell what the true impacts & implications are really going to be”
So… we should just sit back and let them pass, only knowing the full impact after it’s too late to stop it? Yeah, great idea.
I’d add these guys to the list of organisations I wish to boycott over this issue, but the PC gaming industry already lost my money years ago over DRM and other things. I wouldn’t be surprised if these “cautiously optimistic” people are the same ones who made the decisions that lost them my business in the first place.
Anyone else think that their “cautiously optimistic” stand is for claiming later that they “erred on the side of caution” in order to mitigate the subsequent consumer backlash?