Meet Take-Two's Top Lawyer

Meet Take-Two's Top Lawyer

July 12, 2008

The National Law Journal offers a profile of Seth Krauss, executive VP and general counsel for Grand Theft Auto series publisher Take-Two Interactive.

Krauss, who came on board when the Strauss Zelnick team seized control of T2 in early 2007, lists his duties as:

Intellectual property (IP) concerns, First Amendment cases and securities law issues... When he joined the company, the legal department comprised exactly two in-house attorneys, neither of whom was well versed in IP law. The staff now numbers 15, including three full-time IP lawyers and several others who concentrate on licensing and development.

So, what is Krauss's take on T2's seemingly endless controversies?

In the kinetic world of interactive entertainment, the company's business leaders continually generate new challenges for the legal department. The company "creates content that I am very proud of," Krauss said.

 

Nonetheless, Take-Two has had to defend itself against those who consider this form of entertainment scary and dangerous. Krauss works with his counterparts at other game companies and other allies to meet criticism by politicians and critics "who try to politicize the video game industry."...

 

Broad questions about whether to regulate the industry are on the agendas of various legislative bodies, as well. Take-Two has engaged in lobbying in the past, and this responsibility falls under the scope of Krauss' duties.

 

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Re: Meet Take-Two's Top Lawyer

Hmmm....definitely interesting to note...but note quite sure what to make of this...maybe after a good bout of sleep and some coffee I'll actually have an opinon...damn insomnia

Re: Meet Take-Two's Top Lawyer
Keep up the good work Seth Krauss. The road for Videogames to be free from legislation is a long and hard journey full of ups and downs. Just like a Japanese RPG. But in the end once when the creddits roll, it will all be worth it.
Re: Meet Take-Two's Top Lawyer

I certainly hope he's ready yo purchase a new fax machine, or at the least prepared for a flooded inbox and full answering machine.

Re: Meet Take-Two's Top Lawyer

Kudos to him, he must be good.

Re: Meet Take-Two's Top Lawyer

Tch, the difference between him and another certain "lawyer" are night and day.

Re: Meet Take-Two's Top Lawyer

This guy's an expert whilst JT is a fucking novice.

Re: Meet Take-Two's Top Lawyer

Gallagher can araç kiralama say all he wants, but I strongly rent a car believe it's due to his crappy leadership and E3 being a joke. ESA's Board of Directors need to find a way to get out rent a car of this horrid contract with this Bush cronie before there's no one left on the Board.

Btw, I think Atari and Midway will drop out too, but mostly travesti because  these guys have done nothing ttnet vitamin or little and need to start saving costs.

 

GamePolitics ShoutBox

Posted 02/09/10 at 01:18pm
Valdearg: I do agree that it shouldn't be legal. That's for sure.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:16pm
Andrew Eisen: Shouldn't be. Spirit of anti-discrimination laws would seem to include sexual orientation (and eye color). Plus there's always equal protection and such. Never know until you try.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:14pm
Valdearg: @AE: Doubtful. Again, it's perfectly legal.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:10pm
Andrew Eisen: Should have sued (unless that wasn't an option given her financial situation or something). Might have won.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:00pm
Valdearg: Story about a Male to Female TG who was expressly told she wouldn't be given a job because she was TG. Its not the main point of the story, but explicit, perfectly legal discrimination like this exists.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:53pm
Valdearg: Lol, I don't know. It may very well be legal to do so. Though that might able to fall under the "race" restriction, depending on how that point is argued.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:51pm
Valdearg: I don't think they do have any legal recourse. I'll have to dig around, but I seriously believe that if the law doesn't specifically mention Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity, they can still be discriminated against in those 29 states.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:51pm
Andrew Eisen: Eye color isn't covered either but I doubt it would be considered legal to refuse to hire people with green eyes.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:48pm
Andrew Eisen: My explanation is longer than the Shoutbox will allow. Suffice to say that while those who are discriminated against do have legal recourse, anti-discrimination law should specifically cite sexual orientation so that there’s no question about it.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:42pm
Valdearg: "There is no federal law that consistently protects LGBT individuals from employment discrimination; it remains legal in 29 states, and in 38 states to do so based on gender identity or expression." From the Human Rights Campaign.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:40pm
Valdearg: @AE: Why don't you think I'm correct? I know Wiki could be flawed, but as far as it says, its up to date as of June 2009.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:39pm
Andrew Eisen: I don't think you're right but I really don't know and don't have the time to find out. However things actually are, it's very clear how they actually should be.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:34pm
Valdearg: "just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal." I would disagree. If there's no laws against it, it makes it perfectly legal. It's definitely not right, but perfectly legal to do.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:33pm
Valdearg: Meaning in 29 states, private sector discrimination against gays is perfectly legal.. Sickening.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:33pm
Valdearg: 19 states have no protections, and another 10 only have protections for public sector jobs.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:32pm
Andrew Eisen: Well, most businesses have equal rights policies in place and just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal. Still, no argument against adding such protections.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:28pm
Valdearg: More information. Apparently, it's worse than I actually thought.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:28pm
Valdearg: Check the link. Apparently, its more like 20 states that have no protections.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:26pm
Andrew Eisen: In the US? Not that I'm aware of. Sad if true.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:25pm
Valdearg: @AE: Actually, I think, at least for now, businesses can still discriminate against gays in a few states.. Something like 5 or 8. Its part of why Gay Rights Advocates are in support of the Employee Nondiscrimination Act, or ENDA.
Login or register to post shouts