The Entertainment Software Association (ESA), which represents the interests of U.S. video game publishers, has hired a former executive of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) as the organization's new general counsel.

According to an ESA press release, Kenneth Doroshow will take up his new position with the ESA in September. He succeeds Gail Markels as GC. As GamePolitics reported earlier this year, Markels, who had been with the ESA since its formation in 1994, did not have her contract renewed under new ESA CEO Michael Gallagher. Of Doroshow, Gallagher said:

The ESA continues to attract and recruit the brightest individuals. Ken has remarkable expertise in the protection of intellectual property and an excellent understanding of the increasingly connected, dynamic, and innovative entertainment environment we live in. The computer and video game industry will be well-protected with Ken’s guidance and I know he will help facilitate our growth to even greater heights.

Doroshow served as Senior Vice President, Litigation and Legal Affairs for the RIAA, the trade group that represents the U.S. recording industry. As the head of the RIAA’s litigation department, he led efforts to protect the copyrighted works of recording artists and managed cutting-edge anti-piracy lawsuits against companies like LimeWire, Usenet.com and AllofMP3.com.

The copyright community is fortunate to have strong advocates in Washington at a number of trade associations who are working on their behalf, and I am so pleased to see one of these seasoned professionals continue this work to the benefit of the entire creative community. Ken brings a wealth of intellectual property knowledge and experience to the Entertainment Software Association. He has worked in multiple facets of the copyright industries and will be a knowledgeable addition to the ESA. The Copyright Alliance looks forward to continuing to work with Ken in this new role.

The United States Attorney's Office has announed that a Florida man who dealt in pirated video games has been sentenced to 15 months in prison and fined $415,000.

According to a press release, Kifah Maswadi, 24, of Oakland, Florida had pleaded guilty in June to selling Power Player handheld units which were pre-loaded with more than 75 titles, mostly owned by Nintendo and Nintendo licensees. According to the feds, Maswadi earned more than $390,000 peddling the handhelds.

From the press release:

In addition to the 15 month prison term and restitution order, Maswadi was ordered to serve three years of supervised release and to perform 50 hours of community service, which includes educating the public on the perils of criminal copyright infringement.

That's what the press release says. But GamePolitics has probed court records and has many more details on the case:

According to Maswadi's indictment, he charged $23.99 for wired versions and $47.99 for wireless units. Both types connect to televisions.

The case began in 2006 when an FBI agent, acting undercover, placed an order with Maswadi for 100 Power Play units at an agreed-upon wholesale price of $10 each. The agent told Maswadi that he planned to sell them at a mall in Manassas, Virginia during the holiday shopping season. The agent eventually purchased 80 more units from Maswadi. In April, 2007, agents raided Maswadi's facilities in Florida. According to the indictment, he admitted to both selling the units and knowing that they infringed on game copyrights.

Court documents indicate that Nintendo reps found 18 unspecified first-party titles on the Power Play units as well as 58 unspecified titles owned by Nintendo licensees. More than 8,500 units were sold by Maswadi. The ESA, which represents game publishers, estimated that the retail value of the Power Play units at $50 each (although the indictment states that Maswadi sold them for $23.99 or $47.99). While admitting his guilt, Maswadi disputed the government's valuation of the loss caused to game publishers. His sentence was below the typical minimum range for the crimes charged.

A Wikipedia entry on the Power Player describes the system and lists a number of the games included (which appear to be old NES titles). The WikiScanner utility indicates that the ESA edited the "legal issues" section of the Wikipedia entry in April, 2007.

Hal Halpin (left), president of the Entertainment Consumers Association (ECA), gives a wide-ranging interview to gamesindustry.biz today.

The leadoff question from interviewer Phil Elliott concerns the May incident in which Dan Hewitt, public relations head for game publishers' lobbying group ESA, said some nasty  things about GamePolitics (e.g., "Calling GamePolitics a news site is as laughable as saying there's a Cuban free press.").

gi.biz has previously spanked Hewitt and the ESA over the incident. In today's interview Hal Halpin pointed out that some level of conflict between the consumer focus of the ECA and GamePolitics and the publisher-centric ESA, is inevitable:

The vast majority of time our expectations and our goals and our challenges are going to be the exact same as those of the IGDA [International Game Developers Association], the EMA [Entertainment Merchants Assocation] and the ESA - because they represent the industry and we represent the consumers.

And 80 per cent of the time we'll get along great, but that other 20 per cent of the time we're going to be divergent in terms of our interests on behalf of our members - and with respect to the comment that the ESA issued, I chalk it up to a month or two of frustration on behalf of the individual who made the statement. It was a difficult couple of months and they were under a lot of pressure, getting a lot of bad press, and it was easy to take a swipe. It was unfortunate and I think he regrets it.

Asked whether the ESA's future was cloudy, Halpin said:

The ESA is still very viable and the association is really needed. Because of that couple of weeks of discontent between the associations I think people are under the false impression that we want to see anything bad happen to the ESA - and that is not at all the case.

You know, I think a strong and vibrant ESA is really important to the sector as a whole as far as their membership going forward...

Hal also dishes on used game sales and other issues.

FULL DISCLOSURE DEPT: The ECA is the parent company of GamePolitics.

The Entertainment Software Association made a bit of a splash yesterday with news that the state of California had forked over $282,794 to the game publishers' lobbying group.

The money represents legal fees incurred by the video game industry while fighting California's 2005 video game law in U.S. District court. Judge Ronald Whyte ruled the statute unconstitutional in August of 2007.

However, as GamePolitics has reported, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (left) appealed Judge Whyte's decision to the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court earlier this year. While it is unlikely that the state will prevail in its effort to keep the video game law on the books, if it does pull an upset, the ESA is required to return the money.

The details of this arrangement are spelled out in a November, 2007 agreement between the ESA and the state, which says, in part:

If, after all appeals have been exhausted or the time for all remaining appeals has expired, plaintiffs [the video game industry] are no longer the prevailing party in this case, the plaintiffs shall pay back the amount stipulated in paragraph 1 within thirty (30) days of the disposition of the final appeal or the expiration of time for all remaining appeals.

It's also interesting to note that the amount paid to the ESA by California was subject to some negotiation. As GamePolitics reported last September, the ESA initially sought $324,840.

Grab a copy of the settlement agreement here.

The Entertainment Software Association, which represents the interests of US game publishers, issued a press release today announcing that it had received a check for $282,794  from the state of California.

The money represents legal fees incurred by the video game industry while contesting California's 2005 video game law. The statute was declared unconstitutional by a U.S. District Court Judge in August, 2007.

Commenting on the payment, ESA CEO Michael Gallagher said:

California deserves more from its legislators than pursuing flawed legislation. State employees are facing pay cuts. California’s services are being scaled back. And, anxiety is rising in Sacramento to find funds. Rather than tackling real problems affecting Californians, they chose to waste time, money and state resources. It is shameful that legislators pursued personal agendas in spite of the facts.

 

Caregivers are not well-served by court battles and legal fees. Rather, they would have been far better off if state officials worked together with our industry to raise awareness about video game ratings and the parental controls available on all new game consoles—both of which help ensure that the games children play are parent-approved.

It is unfortunate that the state is stubbornly pursuing an appeal that is likely to lead to even more court-awarded fees.

As GamePolitics has reported in the past, the Entertainment Software Association (ESA), which represents the interests of US game publishers, is backing a proposal to bring tougher, DMCA-syle copyright laws to Canada.

Along those lines, GP just picked up on this video of a May, 2008 TV debate on the issue between ESA VP Stevan Mitchell and Howard Knopf, a Canadian attorney. Mitchell is specifically worried about mod chips. He holds one aloft during the program.

For his part, Knopf is aghast at the notion that American corporate interests might force copyright changes in Canadian law. Knopf seems to have the interests of Canadian consumers at heart.

Unfortunately, Knopf does not articulate his points especially well - perhaps due to the tight time frame of the debate - while the hosts of the program seem to jump right in line with Mitchell of the ESA. Maybe that's because the program aired on the Business News Network. shiny dot bulletin comments:

It’s amazing how the hosts are really willing to bend to American market interests as opposed to listening to Howard about the facts and issues.

Knopf runs the Excess Copyright blog, the motto of which is:

Copyright is good. Excess in copyright is not.

The ESA's 2008 Annual Report indicates that the video game industry hopes to uphold the controversial Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) against critics who claim that it restricts Fair Use of copyrighted material.

Based on the following passage from the report, the industry's position seems to be that gamers can create user-generated content only to the extent that in-game tools allow them to do so:

The interplay Between Fair Use and Digital Rights Management User generated content (UGC) is a high-profile policy issue in the copyright community, sparked by the phenomenal success of social networking sites like YouTube.

 

Influential policy papers from the U.K. IP Office and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) cite UGC as a tremendous social benefit of the Internet and call upon policymakers to tweak current legal regimes to better accommodate UGC. This issue has captured the imagination of critics of the current U.S. copyright system, who argue that Digital Rights Management restrictions confound legitimate fair use.

 

ESA IP Policy staff is bolstering its ability to push back against this assertion. In discussions with domestic and foreign IP officials and the OECD, ESA emphasized the rich and varied UGC-features currently incorporated into DRM-protected games.
 

The ESA, which represents North American video game publishers, has released its 2008 Annual Report.

Ben Kuchera of Ars Technica provides a nice summary of the business and legislative highlights.

In reading the ESA report, we were most struck by the sheer volume of legislative efforts directed at video games on both the state and federal level. Many of these we were aware of and reported on here at GamePolitics. A few others flew under the media radar. Here's the state list:

• Colorado: The ESA persuaded the Denver transit company not to ban M-rated game ads on buses
• Connecticut: tax incentives were approved for video game production
• Delaware: legislation directed at point-of-sale died in committee
• Florida: approved financial incentives for game development
• Indiana: game legislation died in committee
• Massachusetts: game legislation is stalled in committee
• Mississippi: game legislation died in committee
• Missouri: game legislation died in committee
• New Jersey: game legislation died in committee
• New York: 2007 bills passed Assembly & Senate, but a joint version was not finalized (in 2008, however, NY adopted a less restrictive video game law)
• New Mexico: "No Child Left Inside" act would have levied a 1% tax on games but failed to pass
• North Carolina: video game legislation carried over into 2008 session
• North Carolina: tax incentive bill introduced (but recently defeated)
• Oklahoma: bill requiring written notice to buyers that games contain violent content carried over to 2008 session
• Oregon: video game legislation stuck in committee
• Puerto Rico: video game legislation carried over into 2008 session
• Puerto Rico: tax on games to fund recreation programs stuck in committee
• Tennessee: legislation introduced to study effects of violent media
• Texas: tax incentives passed for game devs (although ESA report fails to mention content restrictions on such funding)
• Utah: video game legislation died in committee as did a resolution urging the state A.G. to file amicus briefs in other states where the game biz was challenging legislation
• Wisconsin: a 1% game tax is under consideration

On the federal level, the ESA cites four bills introduced in both the House and Senate. Also mentioned are the Annual Video Game Report Card issued in Washington, D.C. by the National Institute on Media and the Family as well as presidential candidate Mitt Romney's "ocean of filth" TV spot decrying mature content in games.

The ESA also recounts a number of parental awareness partnerships forged by the ESRB with state elected officials.

In the wake of this month's poorly-regarded E3, the ESA is using e-mail to survey attendees concerning the show.

While the 20-question survey is a rather brief and not especially probing, it's good to see the ESA, which has operated the show since it began in the mid-90's, beginning to do damage control.

On the other hand, most, if not all, of E3 08's problems have already been well-documented by the gaming press.

The Entertainment Software Association announced yesterday that more than 90,000 units of its charity game pack (left) were sold since last November, raising better than $2.6 million for child-oriented programs.

The campaign is managed by the ESA Foundation, described in the press release as "the computer and video game industry’s philanthropic arm."

Remarking on the success of the charity pack, which included Xbox 360 titles donated by their publishers, ESA CEO Michael Gallagher said:

The entertainment software industry places a priority on giving back to our communities, with a special focus on helping our young people. I’m proud that together with our partners, the ESA Foundation raised a record amount for a variety of worthy causes. We also thank Microsoft Corporation, the main publisher, and the retailers who sold this tremendously successful game pack.

• Web Wise Kids
• Work, Achievement, Values & Education Inc. (WAVE)
• Hopelabs
• Federation of American Scientists (FAS)
• Computers for Youth

As GamePolitics reported in May, the ESA's plan to win political influence through campaign donations got off to a slow start in 2008, spreading just $4,300 among three members of Congress.

But the software publishers' lobbying group dramatically increased its political donations in the second quarter of of the year.

Using publicly available records, GamePolitics has learned that the ESA wrote checks totaling $19,000 to 17 separate candidates for the U.S. House and Senate. Two U.S. Senators received $2,000 campaign donations, while the remaining 15 recipients each received $1,000.

All recipients are incumbents. Seven senatorial and ten congressional campaigns received donations. Nine recipients are Democrats and eight are Republicans.

Recipients of ESA Q2 donations include:

• Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) $2,000 - Majority Whip
• Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) $1,000 - a member of the Joint Committee on Taxation
• Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) $1,000 
• Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AR) $1,000 - has supported the ESRB in the past
• Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) $2,000 
• Sen. John Sununu (R-NH) $1,000
• Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), $1,000
• Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA), $1,000 - the Chief Deputy Minority Whip was reported to be on John McCain's list of VP candidates
• Rep. John Howard Coble (R-NC) $1,000 - the 77-year-old Coble is the longest-serving member of Congress from North Carolina
• Rep. Ed Towns (D-NY) $1,000 - a member of the Energy & Commerce Committee which has in the past considered video game legislation
• Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) $1,000 - chairman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties
• Rep. Jay Inslee (D-WA) $1,000 - from the Seattle area, where so many game companies are located
• Kendrick Meek (D-FL) $1,000 - voted in favor of Net Neutrality in the past
• Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) $1,000 - has expressed concern about games previously on the floor of Congress
• Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) $1,000
• Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) $1,000
• Rep. Tom Feeney (R-FL), $1,000

GP: The notes which follow some of the names are just ballpark guesses as to why a particular recipient may have been of interest to the ESA politically.

As to where the money came from, EA CEO John Riccitiello and Sony CEO Jack Tretton each ponied up $5,000, as did the Microsoft Corporation Political Action Committee.

Calling this year's E3 "soulless" and "fragmented," EA exec Peter Moore (left), who has livened up a few E3 press conferences with wild game launch tatoos, maintains that show operator the ESA and its member game publishers can put things right.

gamesindustry.biz reports on Moore's remarks:

Sega of America president Simon Jeffery (left) has become the latest industry heavyweight to opine on E3, offering support for the Entertainment Software Association, which operates the show, but at the same time calling for changes in future editions of the expo:

As reported by MCVUK, Jeffery said:

E3 was a strange beast this year. We had an extremely strong product showing, had some great meetings, and got our messaging over pretty strongly – all at an event that had all the atmosphere of a large hospital corridor.

 

We [at Sega] are big supporters of the ESA, and believe in an efficient need to communicate with the trade at all levels, but we’d like to see something that represents the fun, dynamic nature of the industry a little better without going back to the insanity that was E3 of old.

Jeffery also took a shot at Activision and other publishers which left the ESA this year:

I’m not at all happy with the principal of coat tailing. It’s like not paying your taxes but still expecting all the government services. I know that the ESA will work hard to bring those publishers back on board, and we believe in them.

The ranks of those who have weighed in on last week's disappointing E3 is both long and distinguished.

Add Entertainment Consumers Association president Hal Halpin to the list, but with a unique twist.

In his analysis of the show for GameDaily, Hal reveals much of the backstory as to the origins of E3:

[E3] was conceived as a standalone show... as [the game biz] matured back in the early nineties. Game publishers were members of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) and showed their wares at...  (CES) - a gargantuan event, which is still held in the Las Vegas Convention Center.... As the sector grew and the confines of the LVCC did not... Game publishers complained to each other about their second-class treatment and talked of their own show.

 

...the publishers approached the CES staff and CEA about a CEA-owned and run dedicated gaming event. The CEA board passed, likely thinking that the up-and-coming business was a fad [and] led the disenfranchised games folks to launch the Interactive Digital Software Association (IDSA), the predecessor of the ESA... the brand new trade association... created a joint venture with IDG, the publishers of GamePro magazine and a formidable event marketing and publishing business... E3 was born.

There's more history in the GD article. If that kind of thing interests you, check it out. Going forward, Hal believes E3 will surive and suggests a less cavernous venue than the LACC as well as offering public admission during the show's final days, as per the Tokyo Games Show:

...the fate of E3 is far from set in stone... I'd have to respectfully disagree that the show is either the raving success that one outlet described or that it is dead, as many have stated. E3 is standing upon the precipice. There are no easy decisions here...

Full Disclosure Dept: The ECA is the parent company of GamePolitics

MCVUK writes that Entertainment Software Association CEO Michael Gallagher (left) endorsed the Pan-European Game Information (PEGI) rating system over that of the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) during last week's state-of-the-industry speech at E3 in Los Angeles.

From the MCVUK report:

As part of his keynote speech, Gallagher was critical of the Byron Report’s highly controversial backing of the BBFC system – and made it clear that the Entertainment Software Association believes it was the wrong way to go.

MCVUK is referring to this section of the Gallagher speech:

Friends and allies across the globe are facing their own challenges. Our success as a business and entertainment medium has caught the attention and the interest of foreign regulators and governments. Earlier this year we saw the release of the Byron Report, which praised the ESRB's work with retailers to help enforce sales restrictions to minors. We are now seeing a robust debate between the BBFC and PEGI. And while this is a European question requiring a European solution, our American experience proves that industry self-regulation is the best way to provide parents the information they need to make appropriate purchasing decisions.

Frankly, we're not reading Gallagher's remarks as expressing criticism of the Byron Review, although the ESA head's preference for self-regulation is clear. On the other hand, it would be natural for the ESA to back PEGI, as its UK game industry counterparts, including publishers' group ELSPA, have expressed a clear distaste for handing game rating responsibilities over to the BBFC.

We've got a request in to the ESA for clarification on Gallagher's view. In the meantime, you can read the full text of Gallagher's E3 speech here.

Q: Who sponsored New York's video game law?

A: There were two identical versions, one in the NY State Assembly and another in the NY State Senate. The Assembly version (A.11717) was sponsorsed by Assemblyman Joseph Lentol (D, Brooklyn). The Senate version (S.6401-A) was sponsored by Sen. Andrew Lanza (R, Staten Island).

Q. How was it voted on in the legislature?

A. The Assembly version was passed 137-1. The Senate version passed 61-1.

Q. How did the bill get to be law?

A. After approval by the Assembly and Senate, Gov. David Paterson (D) signed it into law on July 22nd.

Q. Is this the same legislation that former Gov. Spitzer was favoring before his hooker incident cost him his job?

A. No. The bill under consideration last year would have made selling an M-rated game to a minor a felony crime. There is no such provision in this law.

Q. What does the law require?

A. The law requires:

• Video games sold by retailers in New York State which have a "standardized" and "commonly used" (e.g., ESRB)  rating must display that rating on the outside of their packaging.
• New console systems sold in NY State must have parental controls
• A 16-member advisory council, appointed by the Governor, will a.) study the relationship between violent media and youth violence b.) evaluate the effectiveness of the ESRB rating system and make recommendations concerning it c.) study the potential of creating a parent-teacher violence awareness program to identify and assist potentially violent student

Q: Does the law apply to games sold online as well as in retail stores?

A: No. Although Sen. Lanza's website initially claimed that it did, a reading of the legislation shows that "mail order" businesses, which under NY law include online retailers, are exempt from the rating requirements. GamePolitics contacted Sen. Lanza's staff, which said that the online comment was a mistake and does NOT apply. The law applies ONLY to so-called "brick and mortar" retailers.

Q: Are the current ESRB ratings & content descriptors sufficient to meet the requirements of the law?

A: Yes. As long as a video game available at retail displays an ESRB rating and its associated content descriptors (and they already do), the retailer is in compliance.

Q. What about small publishers or independently created games which are not submitted for an ESRB rating?

A. As long as they are sold via online, no problem. They aren't required to be rated.

Q. Are used games subject to the law?

The Entertainment Software Association, which operates E3, has told GameSpot that despite rampant criticism of this year's expo the game publishers trade association is already gearing up for the 2009 show.

No additional details were provided. GameSpot attributes this quote to to an unnamed ESA rep:

As we do every year, we're beginning the process of surveying exhibitors and attendees to determine potential changes to the Summit. Once this is completed and shared with the ESA's Board of Directors, we will make an announcement about the specifics of the 2009 E3 Media & Business Summit, which will occur.

GP: While it is the nature of organizations to put on a brave face, there are a couple of facts that need to be weighed against the ESA rep's comments.

The first is that since E3 '08 wrapped up less than a week ago it seems a bit early to commit to a 2009 show. One might expect that exhibitor debriefs as well as a thorough E3 post-mortem need to take place in order to sort out what went wrong and determine whether it is fixable. That's especially true given the fairly widespread negative reaction to this year's expo, including this rather definitive comment attributed by the San Francisco Chronicle to EA CEO John Riccitiello:

I hate E3 like this. Either we need to go back to the old E3, or we'll have to have our own private events.

Moreover, the ESA rep's comment seems to imply that the ESA will tell the board of directors (which is comprised of top execs from ESA member game publishers) what's happening with E3, but we'd expect it will be the other way 'round. And since EA happens to be chairing the ESA board this year, one has to wonder. 

Media reaction to 2008's disappointing E3 continues...

Calling this year's show a "complete dud," Ben Kuchera of Ars Technica weighs in with his own four-point program for reviving the once-great expo:

• Take pride in outward appearances... A few banners for big-name games, some creativity in the meeting rooms... these things would go a long way towards getting people excited about the show.

• The keynote should be given by someone we want to hear from... Texas Governor Rick Perry delivered this year's keynote, and it sounded more like a commercial for Texas than analysis into the industry... Give us someone who actually makes games, who can speak to why we love this business... How can a show that is completely filled with interesting games and fascinating people have a keynote so stupefyingly boring?

• If you have a press conference, make it worth going to... Sitting through a press conference, in most cases, is a waste of time that you could spend getting more hands-on experience or talking to people. It's easier and quicker to skip the meeting, grab the press materials, and be done with it.

• Find a new, better venue. Hint: it doesn't have to be in LA...  Why not move it? ...From a social, technological, and even convenience standpoint, Vegas has it all over the Los Angeles convention center.

In his critique of E3, Peter Cohen of MacWorld focuses on game publishers, the ESA and its president, Michael Gallagher:

Last week the E3 [expo]... took place, but you probably wouldn't have known it unless you're in the video game business... the event came up short... and the shortcomings weren't missed or overlooked by gaming executives... They miss the spectacle of the old show... They miss the grandeur, the attention the world paid. In short, they miss some of the same things that, two years ago, they were complaining about.

 

The ESA [which runs E3] has had a tough year. The organization, which represents the video game industry on Capitol Hill... has lost several high-profile members... Some attribute the defections to a change in leadership... Doug Lowenstein, the organization's founder and former president, stepped down in 2007... [and] was replaced by Michael Gallagher, a refugee from the telecom industry who maintains a much lower profile than Lowenstein ever did...

 

There's certainly a place for a major gaming event in North America... One thing is for sure--the way [the game industry is] doing it just isn't working for anyone, not the industry, not the public, not the press.

On Saturday I wrote in my Joystiq column that E3 is dead.

This is my strongly-formed impression based on the sorry state of last week's show at the Los Angeles Convention Center.

Calling the LACC "quiet as a college library during summer," Wedbush-Morgan analyst Michael Pachter raises similar concerns.

Pachter recaps the show in a note issued this morning:

The show was small in scope, and the spectacle of E3 is dead. The Los Angeles Convention Center concourse was as quiet as a college library during summer, with little to attract media attention. The main game display area was similar in size to a school cafeteria (as compared to filling the entire convention center)...

 

E3 is headed for extinction, unless the publishers and console manufacturers wake up to the fact that nobody cares about the show anymore... [the] show is ill-timed, coming after most major holiday announcements are out, and landing during [SEC-mandated] “quiet period” for most of the companies...  The lack of a spectacle will likely keep media away in the future, the lack of surprises will keep retailers away, and the lack of interaction with management will likely keep investors away...

 

We strongly believe that E3 should be held no later than early June (when companies can meet with investors and when some “secrets” have yet to be revealed), and believe that the spectacle should be restored by increasing the size of the show space. 

Pachter goes on to say that game publishers made a mistake by insisting on a smaller show in order to save money:

This is the second year of the new, slimmed-down E3 format demanded by the Entertainment Software
Association’s membership in order to control the significant costs incurred for prior E3 events. We believe that the smaller scale is a mistake, and believe that the media attention attracted by prior shows had far greater value than most of the ESA’s members appreciated.

...the one in which GP explains why you can stick a fork in E3.

Catch it only on Joystiq...