Posts

Hot Off the Press! Panic!

By Samuel Park on February 24, 2025

This month, a new article was published in Computers in Human Behavior called “The relationship between loot box buying, gambling, internet gaming, and mental health: Investigating the moderating effect of impulsivity, depression, anxiety, and stress.”[1] This research confirms already established correlational relationships between loot box spending, problem gambling symptoms and internet gaming disorder. However, it adds new insights by finding that these relationships may be moderated by depression, anxiety, stress, and impulsivity.

Loot boxes are relatively new technologies, and there may be cause for alarm as there is growing empirical evidence surrounding loot boxes’ financial and mental health risks. However, did you know society once panicked about novels and crossword puzzles, too?

In the late 1700s, German theologian and historian Johann Gottfried wrote extensively on the social dangers of children reading adventure novels, claiming that they led to foolish compulsions that were a waste of time.[2] Philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau similarly wrote in his seminal work Émile that premature literacy was detrimental to a child’s natural development, denouncing reading as “the plague of childhood” and asserting that fables were corrupting, encouraged self-importance and vanity, and distanced children from reality.[3]

In the 1920s, the public hysteria over crossword puzzles led them to be described by newspapers and magazines as a “menace” to society.[4] Far from the respectable pastime they are today, these puzzles were criticized as a superfluous use of time and energy and were blamed for causing a decline in “reading and intelligent conversation.”[5] Bookshops reported falling sales of novels in favour of dictionaries and glossaries, while cinemas suffered as patrons abandoned film screenings to solve puzzles at home.[6] Consequently, one editorial, the Tamworth Herald, sounded the alarm by claiming that crosswords directly threatened the economy and family structure, declaring that they “have been known to break up homes.”[7] Attempts at regulation involved police magistrates “sternly rationing addicts to three puzzles a day.”[8] The prizes for completing puzzles soon resulted in the legal system becoming entangled in the debate, with courts weighing whether crossword contests constituted games of skill or illegal lotteries.[9]

Over a century later, it is interesting to see how societal skepticism follows a similar pattern throughout history, with many of the same talking points recycled and adapted to criticize newer forms of media like gaming and social media. Could loot boxes be yet another reiteration of moral panic?

[1] C. Villalba-García et al., “The relationship between loot box buying, gambling, internet gaming, and mental health: Investigating the moderating effect of impulsivity, depression, anxiety, and stress” (2025) 166 Computers in Human Behavior at p 4.

[2] N.D. Bowman, “The Rise (and Refinement) of Moral Panic” in R. Kowert & T. Quandt, eds, The Video Game Debate (Routledge, 2015) at p 25.

[3] D.M. Welch, “Blake and Rousseau on Children’s Reading, Pleasure, and Imagination” (2011) 35:3 The Lion and the Unicorn at p 204.

[4] A. Shectman, “Escaping Into the Crossword Puzzle” The New Yorker (21 December 2021) https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/12/27/escaping-into-the-crossword-puzzle.

[5] A. Connor, “Crosswords: the meow meow of the 1920s” The Guardian (15 December 2011) https://www.theguardian.com/crosswords/crossword-blog/2011/dec/15/crosswords-meow-meow-1920s.

[6] A. Connor, “Crosswords: the meow meow of the 1920s” The Guardian (15 December 2011) https://www.theguardian.com/crosswords/crossword-blog/2011/dec/15/crosswords-meow-meow-1920s.

[7] A. Connor, “Crosswords: the meow meow of the 1920s” The Guardian (15 December 2011) https://www.theguardian.com/crosswords/crossword-blog/2011/dec/15/crosswords-meow-meow-1920s.

[8] A. Connor, “Crosswords: the meow meow of the 1920s” The Guardian (15 December 2011) https://www.theguardian.com/crosswords/crossword-blog/2011/dec/15/crosswords-meow-meow-1920s.

[9] A. Connor, “Crosswords: the meow meow of the 1920s” The Guardian (15 December 2011) https://www.theguardian.com/crosswords/crossword-blog/2011/dec/15/crosswords-meow-meow-1920s.

The Pokémon Company’s Legal Battle Against ‘Copycat’ Game Developers Ends in Settlement

By moada on February 23, 2025

Hello friends, I hope you all had a restful reading break! I wanted to highlight a major update in a long-running legal battle in the video game law world. If you haven’t been following, The Pokémon Company has been involved in a lawsuit with ‘copycat’ game developers for years, and they recently announced that the case has been settled, accompanied by a public apology from the defendant companies.

A Game That Sparked Controversy a Decade Ago

This case goes all the way back to 2015, when two Chinese game developers, Guangzhou Maichi Network Technology and Khorgos Fangchi Network Technology, released Pocket Monster: Remake, a mobile game that looked identical to the Pokémon franchise. The game borrowed heavily from Pokémon’s character designs, gameplay mechanics, music, and branding, leading to widespread confusion among players (it literally copied everything!!!). Despite its obvious similarities, Pocket Monster: Remake remained available for years, reportedly bringing in over $42 million in revenue in it’s first year.

The Legal Battle & Settlement

By December 2021, The Pokémon Company had had enough and filed a $72 million lawsuit in China, arguing that the game was infringing on its intellectual property. While the lawsuit was ongoing, the developers continued running the game and raking in profits. Fast forward to September 25, 2024, nearly three years later, the Shenzhen Intermediate People’s Court finally ruled in favor of The Pokémon Company. The court ordered the developers to pay 107 million yuan (about $14.7 million USD) in damages and issue a public apology. But that wasn’t the end of it. The developers appealed, setting off more legal back-and-forth and a push for mediation.

After months of negotiations, The Pokémon Company and the developers reached a settlement in December 2024, officially closing the case. As part of the agreement:

The developers issued a public apology, admitting to copyright violations.
The financial terms weren’t fully disclosed, but the original damages ruling still stood.

The settlement was finalized in December, but The Pokémon Company announced it publicly on February 19, 2025.

In their apology, the developers admitted:

“[Pocket Monster: Remake] extensively used design elements of the well-known Pokémon Video Game Series, infringing the copyrights related to the Pokémon Video Games, and has unfairly taken advantage of the fame and reputation of the Pokémon Video Games”
“[our actions] have caused significant economic losses to the rights holders and severely damaged the image of the original Pokémon Video Games”
“We hereby sincerely apologize to [The Pokemon Company] and other rights holders, as well as the vast number of players, consumers, and the general public.”
“We will place a high priority on intellectual property protection, refrain from infringing upon any related intellectual property rights or interests of the Pokémon Video Games and their rights holders …”

This public statement marks one of the most significant acknowledgments of copyright infringement in the gaming industry’s history in China.

Legal and Industry Implications

This case marks a significant milestone for gaming law. Historically, copyright enforcement in China has been inconsistent, making it tough for foreign companies to protect their IP. The Pokémon Company’s persistence shows that major publishers are willing to go the distance to defend their assets, possibly even signaling stricter copyright enforcement in China and beyond.

Another key takeaway is the growing debate over copyright protection in gaming. While it’s widely accepted that things like character designs and branding are protected, game mechanics exist in a legal gray area. This ruling strengthens the argument that blatant copies of another game’s assets cross the line, but it also raises broader questions:

Should companies be able to claim ownership over specific gameplay styles?
Should video game mechanics get stronger copyright protection, or would aggressive legal enforcement stifle creativity and innovation in game design?
Does this case set a precedent for major corporations aggressively protecting their IP against smaller developers? Is that good or bad for the industry?

I would love to hear everyone’s thoughts on this!

This video explains everything in further detail if you’re interested in learning more:

Sources

Rated C for Censorship: Legal Discussions Around Video Game Censorship

By mxu2019 on February 19, 2025

Hi everyone!

We hope everyone is having a fantastic and restful reading week! Next Tuesday, we will be discussing topics around the censorship of video games around the world. The outline for our presentation is as follows:

Pre-censorship Video Games
Introduction of Censorship
Video Game Ratings & Sales Censorship
Content Censorship
Sociopolitical Issues & Developments
Cases
Class Discussion

We hope you’re as excited as we are and look forward to presenting to you soon!

Rojan, Michael L., and Michael X.

Read More | No Comments

How Modders Fixed a Broken Sonic Game

By Reese Sidhu on February 13, 2025

Hi everyone,

In light of this week’s presentation on modding, I thought I would make a discussion post about a Japanese developer that is receptive to mods and an example of modding where modders essentially fixed a broken game (similar to Grand Prix Legends).

While it is true that Japanese developers in general do not support modding, SEGA has typically been receptive of mods (and fan games) in relation to Sonic the Hedgehog series.

SEGA has almost always allowed fans to mod or create fan games so long as profits are not being made from the game. SEGA has worked with fan creators before regarding porting games or even making new games as well. SEGA’s stance on modding has been especially helpful considering at times Sonic games release as buggy messes. A prime example of this is the game: Sonic The Hedgehog (more commonly referred to as Sonic 06) which is known for being a complete mess of a game.

Sonic 06 originally released in 2006 and is infamous for how badly the game functions. Sonic 06 is riddled with bugs, has very long load times and numerous glitches that force players to reset the game. Many of the games mechanics barely worked or did not work at all. For example, in Sonic 06 there are scripted sections in which the player should not have to press any buttons, and Sonic should follow a scripted sequence (almost like a cutscene). However, it was common in the game for Sonic to not follow the scripted sequence and often run off the platform during the sequence and cost the player a life. Players also often found themselves soft-locked in the game as well, resulting in players having to restart the game and lose their progress.

Sonic 06 was supposed to be an ambitious project making use of the new hardware at the time (PS3 and Xbox 360) introducing new characters and mechanics to the Sonic franchise but it did not live up to the hype. Sonic 06 is comparable to Cyberpunk 2077 on release (although probably not as bad) however, unlike Cyberpunk, Sonic 06 was never fixed properly by the developer.

Recently however, a fan mod for Sonic 06 (called Sonic P-06) was completed which fixed basically all the issues the original game had. Most if not all the bugs are gone, loading issues have been fixed and many of the broken game mechanics have been either fixed or improved. The mod also added new features as well as many quality of life changes to make the game an overall better experience for players. Nearly 2 decades later Sonic P-06 has shown fans what Sonic 06 could have been if it lived up to the hype. As the creators of the mod are not trying to profit from it, it is unlikely that SEGA will try to take the mod down. If anything, its possible SEGA may try to work with the mods creators in an attempt to remaster Sonic 06 on modern hardware.

If anyone has played Sonic 06 or has similar stories of modders fixing broken games please share them in the comments.

Thank you for reading!

Sources:

https://www.ign.com/articles/sega-is-mostly-okay-with-sonic-fan-games

https://codcourier.org/sonic-p-06-a-fans-bold-redemption-of-sonic-06/

https://www.engadget.com/2019-12-11-sonic-p-06-unity-pc-fan-remake.html

Loot Box Presentation Slides

By Samuel Park on February 11, 2025

Hello everyone,

Here are the slides from Eva, Cléa, and Sam’s presentation on loot boxes today. Thank you for your participation!

LAW 423 Presentation PPT

Read More | No Comments

Class 5 Slides & Video – “Loot Boxes” & “Mods”

By Jon Festinger on February 11, 2025

Read More | No Comments

Loot Boxes: The World of Microgambling in Video Games

By ccatona on January 31, 2025

Hello friends! 🤖

We (Samuel, Eva, & Cléa) are looking forward to presenting to you all on Tuesday!

We will be discussing the legal and psychological world of loot boxes (such a cool topic, we know – you snooze, you lose!). In preparation for Tuesday, here is an outline of our presentation, and a spoiler – we will be also conducting an experiment at the beginning of class (with tasty prizes – gif hint below).