The trade group which represents game developers in the UK and Europe has slammed a British proposal to tax all users of broadband Internet services.

The measure, submitted by Communications Minister Lord Carter, is designed to compensate media companies for losses due to online piracy.

However, MCV UK reports that Richard Wilson, CEO of game developers organization Tiga, ridiculed the idea as, "the tax policy of Alice in Wonderland."

Here are more of Wilson's comments:

The idea that a universal tax on broadband bills should be imposed in order to compensate entertainment companies for losses incurred from piracy and illegal downloads is wrong in principle. Innocent people should not be required to pay heavier broadband bills because of the activities of criminals...

Government policy should aim to provide broadband... at the lowest possible price to consumers and businesses. The last thing that UK businesses need in the current economic climate is another tax... A Broadband tax makes no sense. It is the tax policy of Alice in Wonderland.

There will be no hiding behind a screen name for Chinese gamers, apparently.

According to brief report in People's Daily Online, China's notoriously Internet-repressive government will begin requiring online gamers to register using their real names.

A government official, Zhang Yijun, director of the General Administration of Press and Publication's Technology and Digital Publication Department, is cited as PDO's source.

Zhang also indicated that the operations of four online game companies have been suspended after Chinese government inspectors discovered that their software did not contain the required anti-addiction system.

UPDATE: IncGamers has more info:

...the real name registration system does not mean that gamers cannot use screen-names, but rather that their online gaming accounts must be linked to their real world identification number, which is issued by the government.

[A Chinese gamer] went on to explain that linking a gamer's online account to their ID number means the government can keep track of how long underage gamers are playing. Minors are limited to playing for three hours per day...

A six-year-old Virginia boy who tried to drive his family car to school told police that he learned to drive from playing Grand Theft Auto and Monster Truck Jam.

As reported by the Associated Press, the boy missed his school bus and took the keys to the family ride, a 2005 Ford Taurus. His mother was sleeping at the time. From the AP report:

He made at least two 90-degree turns, passed several cars and ran off the rural two-lane road several times before hitting an embankment and utility pole about a mile and a half from school.

 

"He was very intent on getting to school," said Northumberland County Sheriff Chuck Wilkins. "When he got out of the car, he started walking to school. He did not want to miss breakfast and PE."

The boy's parents were subsequently charged with child endangerment by police. The boy and his four-year-old brother were placed in protective custody.

GP: Giving GTA to a six-year-old? Unbelievable...

A 17-year-old Ohio gamer found himself in hot water after he allegedly threatened to commit suicide while talking to a Blizzard rep about an online game (presumably, World of Warcraft).

The Middletown Journal reports:

The teen was having an online conversation with a representative of Blizzard Entertainment, an online video game company, when he typed that "he was suicidal and that the game is the only thing he has to live for," according to the report.

The company representative called 911.

The juvenile told police it was a joke "to try to get what he wanted for the game," according to the report. He was then handcuffed and placed in a patrol car.

If you feel the urge to download Spore or any other game from publisher Electronic Arts, it's probably best to do so via Steam, rather than EA's online store.

That's because, as Ars Technica reports, EA offers consumers their choice of:

      a.) lousy purchase protection or

      b.) slightly less lousy, but needlessly expensive protection

At issue is the right to re-download your purchased game, in the event of, say a hard drive meltdown or switching over to a new PC. When buying through EA's online store, such rights are limited:

• re-download rights are offered for only six months after purchase, or...
• paying an additional $6.99 extends re-download rights to 24 months

As Ars Technica's  Michael Thompson writes:

Why, exactly, would something like the Extended Download Service even be in existence? Keeping records of who buys what and when they bought it seems like standard business practice and would appear to be one major advantage to buying digitally. Allowing customers to access these records and re-download what they've already paid for seems like a no-brainer; charging people for that option just seems slimy...

In this brave new world, could it be that having to keep track of a physical game disc is actually a better long-term prospect than purchasing something from the cloud?
 

Thompson notes that EA subcontracts its online game distribution chores out to Digital River. But that's of little consequence to the consumer, since EA is ultimately responsible for interactions with its customers.

Atari is no longer chasing file-sharers in the UK.

In August GamePolitics reported that five British publishers, most notaby Codemasters and Atari, were filing lawsuits against suspected P2P game uploaders. In one case, an unemployed immigrant mother of two, Isabella Barwinska, was ordered to pay £16,086 (roughly $30,000) for sharing a pinball game.

But a little sleuthing by gamesindustry.biz showed that the law firm employed by the publishers was a sleazy outfit, indeed. The story got even uglier when a pair of older, non-gaming couples were wrongly targeted for sharing games and, more recently, a Nazi porn movie.

Now, P2P advocacy site ZeroPaid reports that Atari has decided that waging war on consumers is bad business:

The lawsuit [against the older couple] was quickly dropped without comment by Atari, but the bad publicity still lingered and called into question the effectiveness of [law firm] Davenport Lyons' tactics.

Now it seems that Atari has decided to part ways with Davenport Lyons altogether, though it hasn't sworn off targeting file-sharers altogether.

Atari's legal department penned an email to UK website The Register, saying, "In relation to file-sharing, our position is that we always retain and reserve the right to protect our intellectual property from illegal copying and piracy. Whilst we are no longer working with Davenport Lyons, we continue to work with legal advisers to protect our rights."

GP: It's good to see that Phil Harrison has Atari focused on its future and not this kind of anti-consumer nonsense.

A pair of University of Minnesota roommates tracked down their stolen Xbox 360 following a recent break-in, reports MyFox Twin Cities.

Isaac Pacheco and Bobby Harris found their console missing after leaving a door unlocked. Fortunately, the thief wasn't the sharpest tool in the shed. A police investigator subpoenaed Microsoft for the IP address from which their 360 was connecting. It turned out to be the same as that of Pacheco and Harris, indicating that the crook was someone who shared their Internet connection.

The students monitored their account's Xbox Live activity and eventually recognized a name, which led police to recover the stolen console from a neighbor's room. Harris told Fox: 

[We] just felt violated and mad at whoever did it...

 

I don't think we could have figured it out without [the suspect's] stupidity. I think that's safe to say. Because,  if you had taken even the smart enough precautions, I really don't think we would have been able to track it down...

 

It's really nice to know they didn't get away with it.

Say it ain't so, Houser Bros.

IGN reports that the upcoming PC flavor of Grand Theft Auto IV will install the dreaded SecuROM 7 copy protection on gamers' computers.

On an up note, however, the number of times that the game can be installed will not be subject to a limit. GamePolitics readers will recall that EA's much-awaited Spore came with a three-install limit. At least, it did until a gamer revolt prompted EA to relax the resrtiction.

Regarding GTA IV's SecuROM, an unnamed Rockstar spokesperson told IGN:

Having copy protection allows us to protect the integrity or our titles and future investments, but at the same time we have worked very hard to ensure that our solutions do not persecute the legitimate players of our games. Implemented correctly, SecuROM is the most effective form of disc based copy protection and allows us to manage authenticity on a global level for Grand Theft Auto IV...

 

GTA IV PC uses SecuROM for protecting our EXE until street date has passed, to ensure the retail disk is in the computer drive... Product Activation is a one time only online authentication when installing the game. GTA IV has no install limits for the retail disc version... and that version can be installed on an unlimited number of PCs by the retail disk owner... All versions of the game will use SecuROM for Product Activation. Downloadable versions of the game will have additional code if the vendor requires it, such as Valve's Steam program.

Rockstar also warned that pirated versions would not function properly:

Aside from the fact that warez are a great place to pick up a Trojan or key logger, using a cracked copy of GTA IV PC will result in varying changes to the game experience. These can range from comical to game-progress-halting changes.

It may be Turkey Day here in the United States, but the sister of a prominent German video game violence critic has termed Electronic Arts "that pig of a company" at a conference in Munich.

As reported by gamer.tm, Regina Pfeiffer made the remarks at the Computer Game and Violence conference late last week. Ms. Pfeiffer is the sister of Christian Pfeiffer, the head of Lower Saxony’s Criminological Research Institute (KFN). Regina Pfeiffer also works at KFN. According to the report, she was frustrated in her efforts to sue EA over a violent game (Dead Space?) because the publisher is not headquartered in Germany.

EA exec Martin Lorber fired back at Pfeiffer, saying:

Should Mrs. Regina Pfeiffer have actually lost her composure to the point of describing Electronic Arts as being a ‘a pig of a company’, then I can only recommend that she apologises in full – at least, [she should] if she wishes to be taken seriously again in the future...

The [conference] organisers had no interest in holding discussions with the people who manufacture the games that were being criticised there. Initially, I found this very regrettable, because I had told the conference that I would be willing to hold a question and answer session. But now that I see how low the level of discussion obviously was, I’m glad that I didn’t waste my time.
 

European GamePolitics reader Soldat Louis offers more insights into the controversial gathering:

There was a conference held in Munich about "computer games and violence", that reunited many researchers on the effects of violent games. Most were German, to the exception of [Iowa State's] Douglas Gentile. I created a thread [in GP Forums] and tried to translate the first reports on this conference as best as I could...

One longitudinal study presented at the conference (and published in the Journal of Media Psychology) claimed that "violent games" are the #1 risk factor in violent criminality... Bavarian Interior Minister Joachim Hermann took advantage of this conference to call for a ban on "extremely violent video games". And fourth, because despite all that, there were voices of the reason, such as Douglas Gentile and, to some extent, [journalist] Rainer Fromm.

For Soldat Louis' fascinating, full write-up, hit the jump...

When last we looked in on Eidos, it was over a little episode that came to be known as GerstmannGate.

The UK game publisher's ham-handed attempt to manipulate GameSpot's Kane & Lynch review scores unfairly cost long time journo Jeff Gerstmann his editor position and nearly brought the site down as outraged veteran staffers bailed one after another.

Recent reports indicate that Eidos is up to its old tricks, this time in regard to Tomb Raider: Underworld. Naturally, the Penny Arcade crew can't resist making Eidos the star of its latest cartoon.

Hit the link for the full version of The Truth is the New Lie...

Over at kombo, Nick Michetti has penned a thoughtful article titled How Barack Obama Can Bring the Change the Video Game Industry Needs.

While some of his ideas have merit, a suggestion that Obama regulate the used game market marred the piece for me. Michetti writes:

We also need to rein in the used games market and not with DRM. It is fundamentally unfair that developers are being robbed of profits for work that they've done. If the ESA will not offer a mandate, then we'll need the government to do so. Publishers and developers should be entitled to at least half of the price from the sale of every used game.

 

However, we need for there to be caps on used game prices and a Blue Book system for video games to prevent price gouging. We also need for developers to respect our tradition of the second hand market and have part of the mandate state that developers cannot use DRM to inhibit used sales.

Ignoring the fact that the ESA, which represents game publishers, has no wherewithal to issue any type of mandate to game retailers, I just don't get Michetti's point. Actually, I don't get the point of anyone who is whining about used game sales (like Epic's Michael Capps).

The reason is simple. Industry types - capitalists, all - who seek to restrict used game sales would interfere with the way markets work. And they want to interfere in a way that is purely for their own benefit and decidely anti-consumer. In this case, anti-gamer.

By way of example, let's say that a carpenter builds a table under contract from a furniture manufacturer. The carpenter gets paid and the manufacturer in turn wholesales the table to a furniture store. The furniture store adds their markup and sells the table to a homeowner. Later, the homeowner remodels and picks up a few bucks by peddling the table through an ad on Craigslist.

Now, replace "table" with "video game." The game developer is the carpenter. The game publisher is the furniture manufacturer. The game retailer is the furniture store. The gamer is the homeowner.

In both cases, there was an economic chain. Everyone got paid for the services. Are we now going to allow the carpenter and the furniture manufacturer to say to the homeowner, "Hey, you can't sell that table. We want everyone to be forced to buy a new table."

Of course not.

Along this line, I was impressed with a recent blog post by veteran game developer Soren Johnson (Spore, Civ series), who writes:

Many factors come into play when a consumer decides if a specific game purchase is worth the money, and one of those factors is the perceived value from selling it back as a used game. In other words, people will pay more for a new game because they know they can get some of that money back when they trade it in at the local Gamestop.

 

Importantly, this perceived value exists whether the consumer actually sells the game or keeps it. Wizards of the Coast has long admitted that the existence of the secondary market for Magic cards has long helped buoy the primary market because buyers perceive that the cards have monetary value.

UPDATE: Kudos to Nick Michetti, who dropped by to discuss his article in comments. I see that Kotaku also picked up the story.

This week, GamePolitics has been tracking public outrage over Kaboom: The Suicide Bombing Game, a no-budget affair created by an amateur and posted online.

While the game is admittedly in very poor taste, there's not a lot to be done about it. As a non-commercial offering, Kaboom is not subject to any content rating requirements. And, since it is hosted outside the U.K., it would seem to be beyond the reach of English law.

But such logic has never been known to stop British Labour MP Keith Vaz, who has now taken his objections to Parliament. Vaz had the following exchange yesterday with MP Harriet Harman, Leader of the House of Commons:

Vaz: Has my right hon. and learned Friend had the opportunity to look at early-day motion 2416? (quoted):

[That this House condemns the creation of the online computer game Kaboom which asks the player to replicate the actions of suicide bombers; believes that this game is offensive to the families of those killed by suicide bombers and devalues all human life; further believes that this game depicts an unnecessary level of violence; is deeply concerned that vulnerable people under the age of 18 are able to access and play this game; calls upon the game's creator to show sensitivity and responsibility by removing it from the internet; welcomes the findings of a new study from Iowa State University which recognises the link between violent video games and aggressive behaviour; and calls on the Government to revise its regulation of violent video games.]

[The motion] refers to an online computer game called "Kaboom", which asks players to replicate the actions of a suicide bomber. Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that that is offensive to the families of the victims of suicide bombings and that it devalues human life? I have raised this matter on several occasions at business questions and in other debates. What action are the Government taking to remove such material from the internet or, at the very least, to approach service providers to ensure that they take appropriate action? Children and young people will be able to have access to those games. Could we have a debate on this important matter?

Harman: The Government are concerned about the effect on children of violent internet and video games, which is why we commissioned the Byron review. That set out how we need action from parents, from the industry itself and from the Government to ensure that there is proper control of content and clear labelling to protect young children. I pay tribute to my right hon. Friend's long-standing interest in these issues, which he had even before he became Chair of the Select Committee on Home Affairs. Under his leadership, the Committee has taken a strong interest in such matters. I bring to his attention the fact that on Thursday 13 November, in Westminster Hall, there will be a debate on the question of harmful content on the internet and in video games.

GP: Vaz is referring to the game violence study published by Dr. Craig Anderson earlier this week. Anderson's work has been challenged by Dr. Chris Ferguson of Texas A&M

GamePolitics will be tracking Parliament's game violence debate on Nov. 13th.

A British video game industry official recently credited Labour MP Keith Vaz's public criticism of Manhunt with helping to drive sales of Rockstar's bloody game.

Vaz is seemingly at it again.

The Daily Mail reports that Vaz has expressed outrage over Kaboom: The Suicide Bombing Game. As GamePolitics reported recently, the amateur game is freely available online, although not from commercial video game industry sources.

In fact, we hadn't heard of the game until recent coverage by British tabloids. However, comments made by Vaz are helping to spread the word:

Keith Vaz, chairman of the Commons home affairs select committee, said the game contained an ‘unnecessary’ level of violence and offended relatives of those killed by suicide bombers...

 

He also said he was ‘deeply concerned’ that vulnerable users under the age of 18 are able to play the game...

The Israeli Embassy in London is also understood to have complained. Scores of Israeli citizens have been killed by suicide bombers in recent years.

Vaz has called for a ban on the game. However, as a non-commercial product it is not subject to the U.K.'s game rating process. In any case, because it is hosted on at least one U.S. site, it would seemingly be beyond the reach of British law.

GP: While the previously-obscure game is certainly in bad taste, we thought Conservative MP John Whittingdale took a more sensible approach:

I find this game tasteless but I don’t think it will necessarily start turning people into suicide bombers. But those whose lives have been affected by suicide bombings I imagine would find it upsetting.

UPDATE: Dvorak Uncensored notes that a website operated by racist fringe group the Aryan Nation now links to the game.

UPDATE 2: The game has come in for a mention in the Arab press.

As many gamers know, Gary Gygax (left), the famed creator of Dungeons & Dragons, passed away earlier this year.

By way of honoring the man and his achievement, the folks behind GenCon’s yearly charity auction decided to donate the proceeds to Gygax’s favorite charity, the Christian Children's Fund.  The auction, held at this year's GenCon, raised more than $17,000.
 
Unfortunately, according to a post on Live Game Auctions, the CCF refused the donation when it found out that the money would partially come from the sale of D&D merchandise.  GenCon instead donated the money to the Fisher House Foundation, an organization that enables family members to live nearby their hospitalized loved ones.
 
A curious member of the Giant in the Playground forum e-mailed the CCF about its decision and received the following reply:

Christian Children’s Fund made the decision to decline the gift from GenCon, LLC as the request presented to us gave the appearance that CCF (the organization) was an endorser or supporter of a gaming convention, which CCF was not.

 

As [with] many non-profit organizations, CCF is selective in its endorsements or support in order to maintain the integrity of its name and logo. We cannot lend our name to an event for which we have no involvement. This decision should in no way be interpreted as CCF holding an opinion on Mr. Gygax, gaming enthusiasts or the game Dungeons and Dragons.

GU Comics offers an amusing take on the situation.
 
-Reporting from San Diego, GP Correspondent Andrew Eisen