Video & slides below…
Jon
By Jon Festinger on November 24, 2019
By anna-lisa tie on November 23, 2019
YouTube is looking to update their policies so as to better differentiate between real-world violence and gaming violence. In her quarterly letter, the platform’s CEO said the policy changes look to include fewer restrictions on violence in gaming content and matching interested advertisers with ‘edgier content’.
The existing policy has seen a crackdown on violent and “mature” content, which is often prone to demonetisation or being flagged for removal. At the moment, footage of real-world violence and simulated graphic violence in video games are treated the same on the platforms. This has led to frustration among YouTubers who produce gaming content, as they have been less likely to receive ad revenue unless they were playing something obviously family friendly. Perhaps the new policies to come will be beneficial to YouTubers who want to produce more adult-oriented gaming content.
The quarterly letter also addressed other issues including:
All in all, quite a few interesting developments look to be coming to YouTube; we’ll have to wait and see how things unfold. Read the CEO’s letter in this blog post.
By anna-lisa tie on November 20, 2019
This just in today: the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court recently ruled that video game machines called “Pennsylvania Skill”, manufactured and distributed by Pace-O-Matic (POM) are considered “slot machines” under the state law. The Pennsylvania Crime Code, Title 18 Section 5513, provides that it is illegal to manufacture, set up, sell, lease, or own a “slot machine” for gambling purposes, and these machines are subject to confiscation by authorities.
Video game machines/video gaming terminals are machines that allow gamblers to bet on the outcome of a video game. In Pennsylvania, they are found in gas stations and convenience stores. Up until today, they were in a bit of a legal grey area and those who argued in favour of their legality tended to present them as “games of skill”, as distinguished from traditional slot machines, which involve random luck. After this decision, it looks like law enforcement authorities have greater legal justification for seizing these machines and prosecuting those involved in their manufacture and distribution.
About the recent decision of POM of Pennsylvania LLC v Commonwealth of Pennsylvania:
Some links for background context:
By yuan kevin shi on November 20, 2019
Key takeaways
A patent validity challenge at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board wasn’t time-barred because the petitioner was never properly served in a related infringement case, the Federal Circuit ruled.
The PTAB should have considered the timeliness of a petition challenging Game & Technology Co.’s U.S. Patent No. 7,682,243 before instituting a review, the court said Nov 19.
But it upheld the board’s decision that the video game technology patent was invalid in light of prior art.
https://news.bloomberglaw.com/ip-law/video-game-patent-review-not-time-barred-fed-cir-says
By alexander tatti on November 20, 2019
In today’s class we spoke about the evolution of Video Games, especially encompassing the development of streaming through Google’s Stadia or Xbox’s X Cloud, but what about the development of Video Games themselves?
A recent article I read (link below) was discussing Overwatch 2 and highlighted the blurred line between sequels and expansions. Personally, I have always been irritated watching a Video Game release entirely unfinished and unpolished, full of bugs and errors, which is then followed up by an unending torrent of updates being release nearly constantly for months following the game. It’s understandable when a Video Game focuses on its online capabilities and ever-changing mission/loot parameters, but when you have a primarily single-player game – why oh why do we keep updating? It seems that most of the time I purchase a game I can expect massive changes within the upcoming months in order to accommodate some sort of issues in the original. And now we have a new problem: “Sequels” that are just a re-hash of the first one.
Given the trend of the Assassin’s Creed franchise and their monotony of repetitive games, it should be easy enough to change the cover, alter the cosmetics of the map, and add a new campaign and loosely connected story (at least). On the other hand, Overwatch 2 is a “new release” that now has “story missions”, however, the PvP basis of the game is going to be adjusted in tandem with Overwatch 1 players so that there is no divide between the players of each game and eventually the games will apparently be MERGED. That’s right – Overwatch 1 will apparently be fused so that it simply becomes Overwatch 2. So what is the point of a new game? Couldn’t the game just be updated to include story missions?
I doubt this trend will change. We have Path of Exile 2 as well, which is apparently a new campaign based on the original skills and style of the first game – really not much is new. We even have World of Warcraft: Classic, which is a return to the base game without the collection of expansions – while still distinct from WoW, it’s still a return to the beginning. At this point, I fully expect that our favourite franchise games might just get washed out as the same thing with new cosmetics – doubling down on purchasing power for no real developmental changes.
By John Kielski on November 18, 2019
Have you ever thought about how much “stuff” you own that resides entirely online?
Do you attach some sort of real-world value to these assets?
Would you feel personal loss if certain digital assets were irretrievably lost?
In the event of death – what happens to these digital assets?
In this week’s presentation, Ellie, John, and Kiana will discuss the current state of succession law in relation to digital assets and how we must look beyond succession law to view the matter of digital inheritance as an intersection between succession, intellectual property, contract, and privacy law.
As an emerging area of law there are many issues that need to be addressed, however, we have narrowed our focus down to the following matters:
Associated Pre-Reading:
By Jon Festinger on November 17, 2019
GAMES
DIGITAL
A.I.
COMMUNICATIONS
PRIVACY
CREATIVITY
Jon
By Jon Festinger on November 17, 2019
By freder chen on November 13, 2019

There has been a lot of conversation over the past week over Fortnite’s ban handed to FaZe Jarvis.
FaZe Jarvis is a 17-year-old professional Fortnite gamer for the esports organization ‘FaZe Clan’. He decided on making a youtube video, now deleted, showing the unfair advantages hackers and cheaters have when playing this game – and these players are often unpunished.
According to Fortnite’s developer Epic Games, none of what he did was OK. This week, the publisher hit Kaye with a lifetime ban, citing a “zero tolerance policy for the usage of cheat software.”
This ban has led to a lot of controversial discussions in the community as to whether or not public content creators should be held to a different standard than everyday players. He has since uploaded a video where he admits he wasn’t thinking of the potential consequences that might follow showing off a Fortnite aimbot has racked up 10 million views.
There has been support from professional players for Fortnite to reduce this ban, with Tyler “Ninja” Blevins, claiming the game’s celeb players shouldn’t be barred from playing because they deserve special treatment. Other members of FaZe Clan have spoken out in defense of Khattri, suggesting that Epic Games took less drastic action for players who have cheated with greater consequences – whereby another recent cheating incident that involved two competitive “Fortnite” players receiving a 14-day suspension after they were caught colluding with other players to place in a championship. After the suspension, the two players were able to advance and win monetary prizes.
Whereas the majority of the community Fortnite fans think the life ban is justified.
This brings up a greater issue for esports athletes, there are no universal rules for games and cheating – rather full authority is given to the game developers to had out decisions at their will. This will come into greater scrutiny if Epic Games decide to reduce the severity of the game. Another example is in CSGO where members of iBuyPower were permanently banned from competition or involvement in Valve-associated events due to a match-fixing scandal, yet this ban was partially lifted a couple of years later.
Articles:
By jeremy rogers on November 13, 2019
Hi Guys,
Just wanted to follow up on the last week’s presentation with a short video on racism in video games. I was planning on showing a portion of this video during the presentation but due to time constraints ended up cutting it out. The video features a short interview with Terrence Miller, an African American Hearthstone player who made it to the finals of a live streamed competition in 2016. During the match, he was subjected to so much racism that the moderators could not keep up.
Thought it was interesting to see him talk about the incident first hand and gain some other insights on the problem of racism in video game culture.
Hope you find this useful!