1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News EA ceases all gun-brand licence deals

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Gareth Halfacree, 8 May 2013.

  1. Shirty

    Shirty Time travelling rogue Super Moderator

    Joined:
    18 Apr 1982
    Posts:
    12,100
    Likes Received:
    1,410
    OK then. How about:

    Most semi-automatic, magazine-fed firearms used in anger against human beings are by definition 'assault weapons'?
     
  2. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag New Member

    Joined:
    30 Jul 2010
    Posts:
    1,082
    Likes Received:
    10
    I agree with the concept of this but not the type of test. Using a gun isn't so much about intelligence but motivation. Buy one for hunting or protection, go ahead. Buy one with a history of anger problems or psychopathy, and that'll be a problem. In other words, it should just be a simple psych test to see if you're mentally STABLE enough to own a gun. I'd trust a good-hearted autistic child with a gun than the CEO of a multi-million dollar corporation.

    I'd like to know this too haha.
     
  3. damien c

    damien c Mad FPS Gamer

    Joined:
    31 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    2,737
    Likes Received:
    100
    Fair point it was a mistype by me.

    What it should have said is

    "We are though talking about a country that allows a 5 year old to shoot guns, and because he was allowed to shoot the gun legally he was then able to accidently kill his sister with that gun."

    As for the mass shootings part as has been mentioned there was the Sandy Hook shooting which by definition was done with a Assault Rifle since, the definition of a Assault Rifle is a Rifle which is Fully/Semi Automotic Magazine Fed Rifle.







    As for the topic at hand, I don't care what the guns are called in a game because we all normally find one or two that we like to use and then remember what they are called, regardless of what they are called.
     
  4. Harlequin

    Harlequin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    4 Jun 2004
    Posts:
    7,071
    Likes Received:
    179
    http://www.bushmaster.com/firearms/carbon_15.asp

    can be made full auto using a conversion kit made before 1986. legally.


    an assault rifle is , by definition , a Rifle with selective fire , using an intermediate (5.56nato or 7.62nato or similar Russian types) cartridge with a detachable magazine. The Stg44 is renowned to be the father of the modern assault rifle.

    the Armalite AR-15 (which became the M-16 is US military service) was designed to be an assault rifle for both military and civilian use.
     
  5. ModSquid

    ModSquid Member

    Joined:
    16 Apr 2011
    Posts:
    486
    Likes Received:
    13
    You're all missing the point - guns don't kill people, rappers do!

    GLC had it right.
     
  6. LordPyrinc

    LordPyrinc Legomaniac

    Joined:
    7 Mar 2008
    Posts:
    596
    Likes Received:
    5
    ON TOPIC POST: I think EA has a point about the use of the name in a fictional setting, books being the precedent for their argument. I can't believe they have actually been paying manufactures license fees. Quite the contrary, I would think it should be the manufacturers paying EA for product placement (think Coke, Doritos, <insert brand name here> in movies).
     
  7. Parafilm

    Parafilm New Member

    Joined:
    29 Aug 2011
    Posts:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's a fair point from EA but at what point does it stop? Will racing games manufacturers start calling what is obviously a Ferrari an Italiano 400 or something? Then claim it's OK as you could probably write it in a book and get away with it.
    The difference is books don't generally show pictures of a gun or car whereas you can have games with detailed images of weapons or cars or whatever (so are using a products image which has been designed by someone and therefore probably has intellectual property associated with it), so would EA only have something that looked a bit like, say an MP5 but call it an XS1 or something?
    Maybe it will end up a bit like the Chinese car market where you just have things that look really similar to a Rolls Royce but also aren't...

    Also just to join in the good ol' guns debate, I don't see a problem with owning a firearm if you are correctly licensed etc, but surely nobody needs a .50cal sniper rifle for hunting!? I mean, do you want to kill your target or blow it's bloody head off! The big old bang it makes might scare off everything else living in the vicinity so you better not miss!
    I suppose it will be useful for when the aliens invade! Or those damn reds!
     
  8. toolio20

    toolio20 New Member

    Joined:
    29 Jan 2011
    Posts:
    59
    Likes Received:
    1
    Dude, not sure if you're also European or not but conventional wisdom suggests it's never a productive use of time arguing with a European about gun issues - cue Piers Morgan as a prime example - and it never will be. Americans will never give two $#!]$ about soccer, and Britons will never understand the importance of a constitutionally guaranteed RIGHT to own firearms. Plus, engaging someone who is clearly, painfully ignorant of the subject matter isn't a discussion but rather a black hole, so no use trying to make a rational argument - it's all wasted effort.

    OT: Parafilm, I think you're a bit off on your point about books - just because an author doesn't provide a VISUAL representation of, say, a Colt Python, he's still mentioning a specific, name-brand product and manufacturer in the course of telling a story, in almost exactly the same way a video game would (visual rendering and interactivity inherent in the medium being the differentiators). So as much as I loathe EA, they do kinda have a valid point. Then again, there's the question of legal precedent, which I guess the Bell/EA lawsuit will help determine. Overall it's an interesting legal question, and a nice break from all the depressing patent-trolling muck we see in tech news.
     
  9. toolio20

    toolio20 New Member

    Joined:
    29 Jan 2011
    Posts:
    59
    Likes Received:
    1
  10. Horizon

    Horizon Dremel Worthy

    Joined:
    30 May 2008
    Posts:
    765
    Likes Received:
    10
    Personally, this move makes EA look like a bigger dickhead than it is. At the end of the day, consumers are still going to hate them. For gun makers, it will be business as usual. And the gun control, topic will always be a hot topic of debate. It's been shown that overall all gun related crime is in decline year after year but of course there always that heinous act that just keeps stoking the proverbial fire.
     
  11. longweight

    longweight Possibly Longbeard.

    Joined:
    7 May 2011
    Posts:
    10,517
    Likes Received:
    217
    Amazing, you must have lots of freedom points.
     
  12. theshadow2001

    theshadow2001 [DELETE] means [DELETE]

    Joined:
    3 May 2012
    Posts:
    5,164
    Likes Received:
    145
    I think both points of view are sort of right. You have product placement and you have the product being used as a sales point for the game. There is the fiction precedent, there is the product placement precedent and there is paying to use likeness precedent. The only way to resolve this is to show who benefits more from the arrangement, the game company or the gun company.

    On a personal note I don't care if real gun likenesses are used or something sort of similar is used instead as I know nothing about real guns so I wouldn't notice one way or the other.
     
  13. The_Crapman

    The_Crapman Don't phone it's just for fun.

    Joined:
    5 Dec 2011
    Posts:
    4,288
    Likes Received:
    986
    Please do explain why it is important that you have the "RIGHT" to own a firearm? Concentrate there on the imortance bit without just splerging out the constitution. People place far to much importance on things that were written on paper by some guys hundreds of years ago, which have no foresight into the world we live in today. And thats not just aimed at americans, but mostly so.

    I'm not anti-guns, i quite like guns. I own a few bb guns and would probably own a gun if i lived in a country that allowed me to do so. I'm just anti-phycologically-disturbed-people-that-own-guns.

    Also piers morgan is not english, or european, or even human. He's just a c**t.
     
  14. John_T

    John_T Member

    Joined:
    3 Aug 2009
    Posts:
    528
    Likes Received:
    20
    OFF TOPIC:

    Wrong on both counts there I reckon: There are plenty of Europeans (and Brits) who would like very much to have the right to own guns - and, (whether you think it's for girls or not) 'soccer' is definitely growing on that side of the pond. Seattle Sounders regularly get a gate of over 38,000 at their games. That may not be record-breaking, but it's a very respectable number by anyone's standards.

    Also, to add to the 'pro' and 'anti' gun camps you should probably also add a third - the camp I personally sit in, (and I suspect a majority over here do): The 'I couldn't give a flying **** about American gun ownership one way or the other' camp. I don't have to live there, so if you ban all guns, knives, spoons and dangerously sharpened mangoes - or make it compulsory for all people over the age of 8 to walk around with an AK-47 slung over their shoulder and a Magnum .357 in their back pocket, honestly, I don't care. I really don't. I don't know a lot of people who do.

    Many people this side of the Atlantic may find the passionate American desire to keep fully automatic machine guns and sniper rifles in their bedrooms slightly strange and bewildering - but that's not the really same thing as having a fixed opinion on it...
     
    The_Crapman likes this.
  15. yougotkicked

    yougotkicked A.K.A. YGKtech

    Joined:
    3 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    251
    Likes Received:
    9
    with regards to the gun debate: one of the most common arguments against gun control in the US is that any restriction on what type of gun you can own could be used as a legal stepping stone to make it difficult to own any type of gun.

    I personally don't think that argument holds much water, the government isn't some enemy constantly looking for ways to disarm you. That being said, I don't see a good argument for completely banning any type of weapon, I see an argument for stricter controls on the process of purchasing guns. In many states it is easy for someone with a criminal record and documented mental illness to legally purchase a gun, and there is little to no control over how guns are stored.

    P.S. before you start generalizing about Americans being mindless gun-lovers, read up on political lobbying in America. Many of these laws and policies are not something the public voted on, they are put in place because private companies bribed politicians into passing them.
     
  16. John_T

    John_T Member

    Joined:
    3 Aug 2009
    Posts:
    528
    Likes Received:
    20
    ON TOPIC

    Agree with that entirely.

    For me, I believe the idea of 'image rights' has got completely out of hand to the point of absurdity. The weapons manufacturers make weapons, the games makers make games. They are non-competing industries. One game bought does not equate to one weapon sale lost, and one weapon bought does not equate to one game sale lost. Where is the injury to their business to warrant financial restitution?

    For gun makers to jealously guard their names and images in relation to other gun makers is completely understandable - for anyone else it's just daft. It's almost like they're trying to deny their existence, unless you're willing to pay to witness to it.

    Once you make an object and release it into the world, the world has knowledge of it and can talk about it as it sees fit. It may not have the right to try and compete with the original maker by reproducing and selling a replica, (ie make a competing gun with the same look and name) but the world shouldn't have to pay just to mention the object's existence - that's mad!

    Think about where that would ultimately lead: Virtually every single thing you see when you leave your front door was designed by someone, if everyone took to the law courts every time their car/bike/bus/building/shirt/trousers/pavement/everything was filmed/written about/reproduced in video format, our law courts and economies would melt.

    EA were right to tell them to poke it, and the gun companies should frankly be thankful for all the free advertising.
     
  17. Marvin-HHGTTG

    Marvin-HHGTTG CTRL + SHIFT + ESC

    Joined:
    10 Oct 2010
    Posts:
    1,187
    Likes Received:
    58
    Entirely agree.
     
  18. fdbh96

    fdbh96 New Member

    Joined:
    29 May 2011
    Posts:
    1,894
    Likes Received:
    33
  19. Gareth Halfacree

    Gareth Halfacree WIIGII! Staff Administrator Super Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    4 Dec 2007
    Posts:
    12,700
    Likes Received:
    1,971
    Update: according to Ars Technica, EA has actually never paid to licence gun trademarks (images, brands, designs or names) in its games - which is certainly not how I understood it. I'm waiting on a response to an email, to see if I can clarify the company's relationship with arms manufacturers - 'cos it certainly seems like there's confusion here.

    My questions to EA:
    In retrospect I should have asked whether arms manufacturers have any creative control over the games (i.e. "you can't have our weapons jamming, that makes us look bad") but we'll see if they answer the above before pelting 'em with more questions.
     
    Last edited: 9 May 2013
  20. liratheal

    liratheal Sharing is Caring

    Joined:
    20 Nov 2005
    Posts:
    10,741
    Likes Received:
    777
    I think EA has a point, and I hope it sets a precedent.

    I'm sick to the back teeth of using an M107/M82A1 and having it be called "Monkey**** God Slayer" or some ********.

    I want my Colt 1911, my Barrett M82A1, and my Barrett M468 damnit - And everyone knows what they are anyway!

    To the gun control argument folks.. Now is neither the time or the place. I believe that "Serious" has a gun control argument every other month at least.
     

Share This Page