Post Tagged with: "esa"

The Economic Impact of the Canadian Entertainment Software Industry

The Canadian ESA has released a commissioned study on the economic impact of the entertainment software industry in Canada.  The study finds that it is a multi-billion dollar industry with revenues that exceed those for film exhibition and sound recordings.  While the ESA will likely argue that this demonstrates the […]

Read more ›

November 2, 2007 1 comment News

Quebec Gov’t Strikes Deal with ESA on French Language Video Games

The Canadian Press reports that the Quebec government and the Entertainment Software Alliance have reached an agreement under which all video games sold in Quebec will be translated into French.

Read more ›

August 19, 2007 3 comments News

Modifying Canadian Law

A blog reader has passed along a legal demand letter they recently received from Smart & Biggar, a leading Canadian IP law firm, representing the Entertainment Software Association.  The letter focuses on the sale of modification devices – frequently referred to as "mod chips" that can be used to modify or alter store-bought video games or play infringing copies of those games.  Mod chips have been rendered illegal in the U.S. and U.K., while Australia's High Court upheld their legality in 2005 (the law was changed under pressure from the U.S. last year).

The letter argues that the ESA has both trademark and copyright rights in the video games.  In addition to pointing to Section 27 of the Copyright Act as governing the sale or distribution of unauthorized software, the applicability of criminal offences under Section 42 of the Copyright Act, and the fraud provisions of the Criminal Code, it claims:

"any use, offer for sale or sale of modification devices, or 'mod chips' to permit circumvention of our clients' consoles security systems to play pirated or counterfeit software, is also an offence and constitutes direct or indirect infringement of our clients' intellectual property rights by inducing and procuring infringement by others of our client's aforesaid rights."

Given that the letter makes no reference to patent rights, the intellectual property referred to in this sentence is presumably copyright.  This raises at least two issues. 

Read more ›

February 23, 2007 16 comments News