Video Game Law: Growth and Convergence in the Interactive Entertainment Industry
This article covers the first and second parts in a series about Video Game Law. There is a wealth of academic information on the topic of game law on the Internet, but my hope is to provide more practical legal insight in a way that could actually help a game developer or startup tackle some of these issues in practice and understand the lay of the land. As much fun as it is for lawyers like me to contemplate hypothetical issues, like whether there is such a thing as trespass in a virtual world like Second Life, these issues don’t generally help people make games. The goal of this series is to give game makers a practical look at the legal issues they should consider when running a game company. My clients don’t pay me to wax philosophic about laws that don’t exist yet, but I do spend a lot of time answering real questions that game makers face. This series of articles will share that insight with you.
DISCLAIMER: Please read the disclaimer language using the link at the top of this page, or click here. This is not legal advice. The law varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and you should consult with an attorney before relying on anything you read here. I also need to say that this article and this blog do not reflect the views of my employer Wilson Sonsini Goodrich and Rosati.
Part One: Growth in the Interactive Entertainment Industry.
This first part “Growth in the Interactive Entertainment Industry,” is not legal in nature, but is intended to give an overview of why practitioners and business people should be paying attention to this stuff. Gaming as a form of entertainment is becoming wider spread each year.
To give you an idea of the size of the industry, game related products accounted for close to eight billion dollars in 2007. Around two out of three households in the US plays games, and that number is growing. The average age of a gamer in the States is 35. One in four gamers is over 50. The game industry spans a variety of game types, from basic but highly profitable Casual Games, to more in-depth “Hard Core” PC or console games, to virtual words and massive multiplayer online games.
Part Two: Convergence of Games with More Traditional Media.
As technology has improved, games have become less expensive to make, while at the same time the success of blockbuster releases like Halo 3 and Grand Theft Auto IV are fueling a wave of big budget games with cinematics and storytelling that rival motion pictures. Story telling in games has its roots in text based adventure games like Zork, where games were a hybrid of technology and literature. This was extended into graphical games like the Legend of Zelda, where the game was graphical, but the story telling was still implemented with text. Gaming in the 80s required a lot of reading, and if Zork is the gaming equivalent of a book, then the Legend of Zelda is the equivalent of a book with illustrations.
There are still games that can be traced back to a literary tradition of story telling, but most modern games can best be compared with motion pictures. Games like Halo 3 use a combination of music, professional voice talent, and detailed cinematic cut scenes to advance the story. It is no longer enough for a game to have a good written story, the story must be brought to life with visuals and sound. Like a good motion picture, when executed properly, the player feels like they are transported into the story. The best example of this based on the current generation of games is BioShock from 2K Games. Video below:
Games are converging with traditional media, like motion pictures and television, in terms of financial proceeds. The chart below shows revenues from music, motion pictures, and games over the past 5 years. What is more interesting, however, is the convergence of games with traditional media in terms of the entertainment value that they represent. Every year games become more compelling. Developers become more and more skilled at taking advantage of current hardware, and every 4 years or so, consoles are upgraded, causing spikes in game quality. Consider the value proposition that a motion picture or music album represents. This experience has not changed significantly in the last ten years. Movie screens are bigger, and music is now downloadable, but the content is essentially the same. Movies today don’t tell stories better than they did ten years ago. Music today has changed but is not significantly more entertaining that it was ten years ago.
When you compare games today with what was available in 1997, it is clear that players are getting more for their money, and the overall gaming experience is more compelling.
By way of example, in 1997 Sony launched its Gran Turismo series, and the top grossing movie of that year was Titanic. Watch the videos below and decide for your self which is more entertaining.
Now skip forward ten years and take a look at Sony’s new Gran Turismo V, as compared with the top grossing movie of 2007, Spiderman 3. It is getting harder to determine which is more entertaining. The difference between Titanic and Spiderman 3 is relatively small with respect to how entertaining those movies were, but the difference in quality between the original Gran Turismo and the new Gran Turismo V is hard to ignore. Ask yourself what games will look like in another 10 years. Assuming that movies don’t reinvent themselves somehow, it is likely that movies will still be telling stories in the same format, and are unlikely to rival interactive entertainment for pure entertainment value.
So why does this matter? Two reasons.
From a business perspective, money. In ten years the interactive entertainment industry will be as big or bigger than the movie industry. Games will pull people away from the television and keep them from going to movies. Games are an active, as opposed to passive experience, and are increasingly social, with online play practically standard on most new console games. If you are in the advertising, music, motion picture, or televisions industries, this stuff should matter to you because it is where the money will be spent. If you are in the technology space, games will be the driver of new hardware sales (computers are already faster than they need to be for non-gaming activities).
From a legal perspective, this convergence matters because the legal needs of game companies are changing. Gaming companies have historically required legal expertise in technology and software related intellectual property. As games evolve game lawyers spend more time addressing pure entertainment issues, like rights of publicity, negotiation with talent, disputes over credits, and merchandising related to game franchises.
These first two parts of this series are a non-legal introduction to the articles to come. In the next few weeks, I will be posting about the decisions game companies must make when introducing virtual property into their game universe. I will be posting about management of on-line communities, and how and when you can kick people out of your game. I will cover talent related issues, and whether or not your game company wants to work with guild vs. non-guild talent. Stay tuned.
Up Next:
- Part Three: Virtual Property Law.
- Part Four: On-Line Community Management.
- Part Five: User Generated Content Issues.
- Part Six: Talent Issues. Guild or No Guild.
- Part Seven: Game Specific IP Issues.
- Part Eight: New Revenue Streams for Game Companies.
- Part Nine: Unsolicited Submissions.
- Part Ten: Development and Publishing Agreements.
- Part Eleven: Gambling, Lotteries, Sweepstakes and Contests.
- Part Twelve: In-Game Currency Issues.
- Part Thirteen: Content Regulation and Freedom of Speech.
- Part Fourteen: Merchandising.

















Monday, July 21, 2008
1 Comment