Is Branding Your Cup Of Tea?

Filed Under (Burgers) by on 12-09-2017

Is Branding Your Cup Of Tea?

by

Brand Lover

Branding has lately been the talk of the industries in Malaysia. But, why is it so important especially in today s market? One of the local companies called peopalove has long observed the evolution of branding in our local market. They have been established since 1997… and according to peopalove, it is a process to make businesses, products, services, retails, personalities, corporates, commodities, organisations, countries… anything and everything branded!

Quite true isn t it… we do see brands derived from all sorts of things in the market these days. That includes drinks (like

Milo

, Coca-Cola, 100 Plus, Ribena), fast food (like McDonald s, Burger King,

Old Town Kopitiam

, Manhattan Fish Market), fashion (like MNG, GAP, Giordano, Calvin Klein), watches (like Rolex, Patek Phillips, Omega, Oris), personalities (like Dato Nicol David,

YouTube Preview Image

P Ramlee

, Dr M, President Obama, Dato Michelle Yeoh), celebrities (like Michael Jackson, Paris Hilton,

Amber Chia

, Justin Bieber), cars (like Honda, BMW, Mercedes, MINI), phones (like iPhones, Black Berry, Nokia, Samsung), mineral water (like Evian, Perrier, Spritzer, Cactus), cartoon characters (like Mickey Mouse, Simpsons), ice cream (like Baskin-Robbins, Haagen-Dazs), sports attire (like Nike, Adidas, Puma) and lots more. Branding is not just catered to premium, expensive or top-notch products or services. As a matter of fact, it can be applied to anything and everything, including people like you and me.

According peopalove – product brands, service brands, and other types of brands can be holistically approached in their brand executions in order to make them loved by the target audiences, wanted and branded in the market.

Well, many of us love Maggi instant noodles it s not expensive, but it is wanted (and well craved by many) in the market. And that makes Maggi wanted and branded in the market. And the same goes to Nescafe, KitKat, Smarties, Mentos, Mor Far Kor , Cafe 21, Jacobs, Kellogs, Colgate, Premier, Durex… the list goes on and on.

The methodology of branding which is utilised and leveraged on in the Asian market may also differ from those methodologies used in the Western regions of the world this is what you call as glocalised

branding strategies

(strategies which are customised according to the local market scenario). Of course, there too are some similarities in the approach practised between the local and international markets branding strategies applied must be the right and relevant strategies for the brand to communicate effectively and persuasively to the respective target audiences.

In short, whether you are a

brand consultant

, owner, or just a consumer like me… branding IS everyone s cup of tea. Well, I look forward to having my Lipton upon uploading this article. Yam cha, yam seng everyone!

A blend of my consumerism thoughts together with

branding

insights from peopalove.com

Article Source:

ArticleRich.com

News briefs:July 22, 2010

Filed Under (Uncategorized) by on 12-09-2017

Wikinews Audio Briefs Credits
Produced By
Turtlestack
Recorded By
Turtlestack
Written By
Turtlestack
Listen To This Brief

Problems? See our media guide.

[edit]

Andrew Marr angers bloggers, describing them as ‘inadequate, pimpled and single’

Filed Under (Uncategorized) by on 12-09-2017

Monday, October 11, 2010

British journalist Andrew Marr has angered bloggers by suggesting they are “inadequate, pimpled and single.” Marr, who was formerly the BBC’s political editor, also said that citizen journalism is “spewings and rantings of very drunk people late at night”. He made the comments at the Cheltenham Literary Festival, saying: “A lot of bloggers seem to be socially inadequate, pimpled, single, slightly seedy, bald, cauliflower-nosed young men sitting in their mother’s basements and ranting. They are very angry people.”

Marr, who now hosts a flagship Sunday morning show, The Andrew Marr Show, on which he has recently interviewed British Prime Minister David Cameron and ousted BP executive Tony Hayward, added: “OK – the country is full of very angry people. Many of us are angry people at times. Some of us are angry and drunk”. His comments sparked outrage from bloggers, one of whom dismissed them as “stupid generalisations.” Another said that they were “sure that Andrew Marr did not mean all bloggers, but it is unfortunate that he did not seem to make much of a distinction in his statement.” Another blogger, writing on Twitter, said they supported Marr’s arguments. “Just read Andrew Marr’s comments on blogging,” they said. “I blog and I agree with most of what he says. I don’t read blogs for news, doubt I ever will.”

Aside from the paradox of him indulging in a rant to complain about other ranters, it is the one-sidedness of his argument that is so striking

Other journalists also criticised the comments. Krishnan Guru-Murthy, a newscaster for Channel 4 News, said that it is “true that flicking through the comment section of some political blogs can easily make you think the blogosphere is populated by obnoxious trolls. But there are plenty of thoughtful, insightful people writing online too: you just need to find them. They might not be household names, or worthy of a slot on Radio 4, but to dismiss them out of hand seems wrong. As for bloggers being ‘inadequate, pimpled and single,’ that’s no way to talk about Jon Snow. He isn’t single.”

“We know our viewers want commentary and analysis alongside their news and our blogs help us give more of that,” Murthy said. “Obviously we can’t give opinion in the way bloggers who aren’t also public service broadcasters can, but we enjoy reading other people’s opinions and the best blogs are much more than rants, often breaking stories, too. And anyway, I like reading the occasional rant. But as a blogger if you offer up something to the wider world you should expect people to say what they think of it.”

Roy Greenslade, a professor of journalism at City University London, and former editor of the Daily Mirror, said: “Aside from the paradox of him indulging in a rant to complain about other ranters, it is the one-sidedness of his argument that is so striking. None of us who write blogs are unaware of vituperative contributions from people who like to remain anonymous … It’s the price we [bloggers] pay –a small price, in my view– for a communications system that allows for public participation.” Greenslade added that he thought Marr “seems to be damning the whole blogosphere when, as we all know, there are thousand upon thousand of bloggers who are making valuable public interest contributions on the net day by day, even hour by hour. Marr, to use an archaic but apposite idiom, simply can’t see the wood for the trees.”

GM recalls 1.3 million cars over steering issues

Filed Under (Uncategorized) by on 11-09-2017

Wednesday, March 3, 2010

General Motors (GM) announced on Tuesday a recall of 1.3 million Chevrolet and Pontiac cars in the US, Mexico, and Canada over problems with the power steering system.

Recalling these vehicles is the right thing to do for our customers’ peace of mind

The models, the 2005–2010 Chevrolet Cobalt and 2007–2010 Pontiac G5 in the US, the 2005–2006 Pontiac Pursuit in Canada and the 2005–2006 Pontiac G4 in Mexico, were affected by a fault that causes the power steering in the vehicles to fail. The company says that cars can still be safely controlled even after the loss of power steering, although more effort to turn the car would be required.

GM is currently working on developing a fix for the problem, after having conducted an internal investigation for more than a year, beginning last January. In addition to GM’s investigation, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration also conducted an investigation on the Cobalt, which began in January 2010. The investigation was begun after more than a thousand complaints about the model were received by the agency, including reports of 14 crashes caused by the fault. GM contacted the NHTSA about the problem on Monday.

GM blamed the issues on an external supplier partially owned by Toyota, another company currently in the process of a major recall of more than eight million vehicles. According to GM vice-chairman Bob Lutz, the supplier, which was not named, had not met “all requirements for reliability and durability.” In his comments, given at the Geneva Motor Show, Lutz also said that financial responsibility for the recalls had yet to be determined.

Be A Smart Shopper With Online Coupon Codes}

Filed Under (Cakes) by on 04-09-2017

Submitted by: AZURA C

Almost everyone is fond of discounts. Thus coupons are ultimate marketing and promotional tools used by the entrepreneurs to lure customers. With the increasing prices of the commodities, consumers are determined to save more even if they can manage without the discounts. Maximum shoppers who go for online shopping look forward for coupons codes to reduce the price of MRPs. One of the biggest merits of using these coupons is that apart from the amount of discounts given over the price tags of the products, the company also gives free shipping facility to the customers.

Different varieties of schemes are launched over the coupons so that the customers can redeem them with all the more joy. Coupon codes can be used by the customers while buying laptops, tablets and other electronic gadgets. The online available coupons help one to receive up to 50percent of discounts on the latest seasonal products. Amongst various varieties of coupons, some can be used more than once. Such coupons are highly beneficial and are mostly in demand.

Online coupons are the simplest to search. All one just needs to go online and type for online coupons or coupon codes on the search bar. One will be able to see various websites arrayed over ones screen immediately. One can also prefer to sign up in order to get the list of all the favorite items which one prefers to buy online. One will be required to render the coupon code once the item one is looking for is arrayed online. Unlike traditional coupons, the online available coupons are much simpler to redeem. One is not needed to buy newspapers and store the coupon cuttings safely. Web world has eliminated all such hassles and has turned it to be highly convenient to deal with the coupon codes.

YouTube Preview Image

With the online available coupons, one can also choose to buy even those items which one would have otherwise left in their absence. What`s more fun is that the shoppers can avail discounts even on the items which they would have otherwise left. The free home delivery acts like a cherry over the cake. One need not pay any sort of extra shipping charges for the items purchased.

Undoubtedly coupon codes are the ultimate way to relish online shopping and save bucks. They are easiest to avail and access. One simply needs to browse over the official website of the retailers in order to get a huge discount over the online shopping done. A smart shopper is the one who tries getting best out of the money spend. Such shoppers try to accumulate the coupons in order to utilize them when there are additional discounts on the products.

Tigerdirect coupon codes assist such smart shoppers in doing that. Such coupons are easy to avail and easy to use. Tiger direct coupon 10% turns shopping easier and quicker. It enhances the purchasing power of money which enables one to buy more products out of same amount of money.

About the Author:

Tigerdirect coupon codes

assist such smart shoppers in doing that. Such coupons are easy to avail and easy to use.

Tiger direct coupon 10%

turns shopping easier and quicker. It enhances the purchasing power of money which enables one to buy more products out of same amount of money.

Source:

isnare.com

Permanent Link:

isnare.com/?aid=1861573&ca=Shopping }

Eastern Conference wins 2008 NBA All-Star Game

Filed Under (Uncategorized) by on 04-09-2017

Monday, February 18, 2008

Eastern Conference 134 128 Western Conference

The Eastern Conference defeated their Western Conference counterparts at the 2008 National Basketball Association All-Star Game held at New Orleans Arena in New Orleans, Louisiana on Sunday. The final score was 134-128.

The East took an early 11 point lead in the first 5 minutes, due to an injured Kobe Bryant only playing 2 minutes before sitting on the bench for the rest of the game. “There’s one player we really, really missed, and that was Kobe,” said West coach Byron Scott. The West later reduced the lead to 2 points, but at halftime, the East led 74-65.

The West trailed by 13 at the beginning of the fourth quarter, but rallied behind New Orleans point guard Chris Paul, who had seven assists in the final period. With 2:48 remaining, Brandon Roy scored a layup on an assist from Paul, giving the West a 122-119 lead, their biggest lead of the game.

The East then answered back with two three-pointers from Ray Allen, before Chris Paul tied the game with a three-pointer of his own. However, the East would then take the lead and the game with layups from Dwyane Wade and Allen, as well as a driving dunk from LeBron James. A Brandon Roy three-pointer put the game within three points with 8.7 seconds left, but 3 free throws from Ray Allen sealed the win for the East.

“The fourth quarter was crazy,” said Chris Paul. “We were down 13. We picked up the intensity. We took the lead a few times but Ray Allen was unbelievable the way he shot the ball. And that last dunk by LeBron, we had two people on him but that still wasn’t enough.”

With 27 points, 8 rebounds, and 9 assists, James was named the All-Star Game’s Most Valuable Player for the second time in his career. Some television commentators also considered Ray Allen a likely choice for the award, with 14 of his 28 points coming in the final 3 minutes of the game. “I think Ray Allen had a heck of a shooting night,” James said after being presented the award.

Contents

  • 1 Other All-Star events
    • 1.1 T-Mobile Rookie Challenge
    • 1.2 Haier Shooting Stars Competition
    • 1.3 Playstation Skills Challenge
    • 1.4 Foot Locker Three-Point Shootout
    • 1.5 Sprite Slam Dunk Contest
  • 2 Related news
  • 3 Sources

Know About Conventional Accounting Methods And Online Accounting Software

Filed Under (Management Software) by on 08-08-2017

Know about conventional accounting methods and online accounting software

by

quadraacguru

Prior to the invention of software technology, the conventional accounting methods were time consuming. Not only because many accounting books had to be maintained, but also the scope for errors and mistakes was very extensive. Beginning from journal entries and ledger entries to the last and final statement of Balance Sheet, many hours of accounting work had to be invested by staff who work in accounting department.

Keeping in view of the technology benefits, there is a good emergency of small businesses and in this line of business development, online accounting software multiplies the benefits to all small business owners.

Learning about accounting methods and self-login procedures, keeping the confidentiality of the data are all assured and online accounting software guarantees the promising results about accuracy and speed. Further there is no scarcity of memory or spoilage of data as it rests safely online for any future period of time.

Login to access and make entries, or forward statements to customers or file your tax return or calculate your debtors amount or creditors amount or any other info that you require can be easily draw from online accounting software.

Saving time and scope for high accuracy :

Physical books are a matter of time and maintenance. Further these have to be stored in a safe place in for the point of reference and further these are very delicate to store. Not only it requires lot of space but you definitely need to take care of them to access the info at any point of time.

YouTube Preview Image

Whereas online accounting software removes all the hindrances and gives you most high record of reliance and dependence to get access to the data at any time. This is really essential that you can trust and rely on the source of online accounting software.

Another vast benefit of online accounting software is that, if there corrections to be made, you can verify and make necessary corrections whereas for physical accounts books, it is a matter of a lot of corrections and it involves lot of time and labor. It also slows down the work of accounting procedures.

Therefore it is always ideal to choose online accounting software that ensures saving of time and it gives a lot of scope for maintaining high accuracy. Keeping in view of the benefits given by online accounting software it is always recommended to choose and opt for these benefits and draw the assistance on a constant pace.

Technology benefits for small businesses :

There will be many doubts and questions as to how software technology can help small businesses. But the fact is, every small business has a lot of helpline from online sources and especially with online accounting software. Technology speeds up the process and offers a lot of system in many aspects. It simplifies every lengthy accounting procedure with an easy process and provides exceedingly good results. Online accounting offers similar benefits similar to that of regular books of accounting and in fact it offers more convenience to login and access your business account, anytime and anywhere.

In spite of the fact that accounting procedures are very lengthy and time consuming, opting to choose easy and simple

billing software

online accounting methods will not only guarantee promising results but most importantly, it provides a very good scope for improving businesses in a plenteous strategies.

Online accounting software is not only knowledge- based but it is a path of success as there is every detail of business available in your business account. Learning to login and entering journal entries, passing ledger entries and learning the process and system of preparing trial balance and balance sheet or preparing weekly or periodical business reports, is done very easy and this is much more quick and speedy as compared to regular business accounts maintenance in the conventional methods.

Building customer base and efficient services :

With the regular methods of books of accounts, building customers goes into marketing strategy whereas online marketing can also be made with

accounting software

online accounting software. Forwarding bills, customer letters and newsletters is a proven method of marketing your business products and services and this is carried out very safely and systematically.

Cutting Costs on Accounts Management :

www.accounting-guru.net is a proven accounting website that can save exceedingly good costs while improving efficiency and it brings a very good saving factor to the business owner. Recruitment of staff for accounting maintenance is reduced and it brings a lot of mobility to access and review your business anytime and anywhere.

Accounts maintenance requires a lot of stationery such as books, pens, pencils, folders and binding records whereas all such costs can be reduced by opting to choose online accounting software which is really benefiting. Apart from cutting manpower, stationery and saving time, it brings a lot of accuracy for your business and it is really important that accounts maintenance must go on with accuracy for a longer period of time.

Therefore online accounting software not only ensures speed and accuracy, but it also moves your business transactions in a very efficient way. Growing expenses for accounts management can be cut in by large margins and you can draw the benefit of efficient online accounting system in an extensive way and achieve good results for your business.

What are the highlights of best accounting software :

Amidst of plenty of accounting software making an entry into the market, it will definitely indicate a scope for ambiguity in choosing the best accounting software. Best accounting software will always offer easy registration procedure, maintenance of data confidentiality and mobility to access anytime. It also ensures speedy and accuracy and saves a lot of time and money.

The technology benefits in utilizing the best services can only be achieved when there is accuracy in online accounting software. Especially with the growing online businesses, keeping an online accounting registration will speed up the daily processes and will produce the best results for growth in business. This is really required in order to ensure to smooth and efficient functioning of a business.

Accounting guru provides online accounting software .We Are all known for our quality of online inventory software our services fields in Bangalore online billing software maintenance of ledger accounts. Call Us +91 9632042668 Visit at: https://www.accounting-guru.net/

Article Source:

ArticleRich.com

California’s violent video game ban law ruled unconstitutional by US Court of Appeals

Filed Under (Uncategorized) by on 08-08-2017

Sunday, February 22, 2009

A U.S. Court of Appeals on Friday has declared unconstitutional California Assembly Bills 1792 & 1793, the California “ultraviolent video games law” that sought to ban the sale or rental of violent video games to minors.

Federal judge Consuelo M. Callahan has ruled that the 2005 statewide ban, which has yet to be enforced, violates minors’ rights under the US Constitution’s First and 14th amendment because even the most graphic on-screen mayhem, video game content represents free speech that cannot be censored without proper justification.

The Court has ruled that there’s no convincing evidence it causes psychological damage to young people. The 3-0 judgment has affirmed an earlier ruling by a U.S. District Court, which barred enforcement of the law on the basis that it was “unduly restrictive” and “used overly broad definitions,” and that the state failed to show that the limitations on violent video games would actually protect children.

In 2005, Leland Yee (???), a California State Senator (in District 8 which includes the western half of San Francisco and most of San Mateo County), Speaker pro Tempore of the Assembly (D-San Francisco/Daly City), introduced California Assembly Bills 1792 & 1793 which barred “ultra-violent” video games from minors under the age of eighteen in California and mandated the application of ESRB ratings for video games.

“California Assembly Bills 1792 & 1793” were commonly called the “ultraviolent video games bills” or simply “video game ban” bills. Bill 1792 banned the sales of such video games while Bill 1793 required signs explaining the regulations on said games to be placed where such were sold. Both bills were passed by the Assembly and signed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger into law (AB 1179) on October 7, 2005.

Explicitly, these two bills provided that:

  • AB 1792 will place ultra-violent video games into the “matter” portion of the penal code, which criminalizes the sale of said material to a minor.
  • AB 1793 will require retailers to place M-rated games separate from other games intended for children, and will also require retailers to display signage explaining the ESRB rating system.

Yee, a former child psychologist has publicly criticized such games as Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas and Manhunt 2, and opposes the U.S. Army’s Global Gaming League.

On October 17, 2005, before the effectivity of the challenged Act, plaintiffs Video Software Dealers Association, the not-for-profit international trade association dedicated to advancing the interests of the $32 billion home entertainment industry and Entertainment Software Association, a 1994 US trade association of the video game industry have filed lawsuit (D.C. No. CV-05-04188-RMW) against the defendants Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, CA Attorney General, Edmund G. Brown, Santa Clara County District Attorney George Kennedy, City Attorney for the City of San Jose, Richard Doyle, and County Counsel for the County of Santa Clara, Ann Miller Ravel.

Plaintiffs’ counsel, Jenner & Block‘s Paul M. Smith has filed a declaratory relief to invalidate the newly-enacted California Civil Code sections 1746-1746.5 (the “Act”), on the grounds that it allegedly violated 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the First and Fourteenth Amendments.

Plaintiffs have submitted that “the Act unconstitutionally curtailed freedom of expression on its face based on content regulation and the labeling requirement, was unconstitutionally vague, and violated equal protection. California’s restrictions could open the door for states to limit minors’ access to other material under the guise of protecting children.”

By December 2005, both bills had been struck down as unconstitutional, by Ronald M. Whyte, District Judge, Presiding in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in San Jose, thereby preventing either from going into effect on January 1, 2006.

Judge Whyte has granted plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction in “Video Software Dealers Ass’n v. Schwarzenegger,” 401 F. Supp. 2d 1034 (N.D. Cal. 2005), and cross-motions for summary judgment, in “Video Software Dealers Ass’n v. Schwarzenegger,” No. C-05-04188, slip op. (N.D. Cal. Aug. 6, 2007).

Similar bills were subsequently filed in such states as Illinois, Oklahoma, Minnesota, Michigan and Louisiana have been ruled to be unconstitutional by federal courts on First Amendment grounds, according to Sean Bersell, a spokesman for the Entertainment Merchants Association.

The defendants, in the instant Case No. 07-16620, have timely appealed the judgment. On October 29, 2008, the appealed case was argued and submitted to the Sacramento, California‘s U.S. Court of Appeals, hence, the promulgation of the instant 30 pages decision (No. 07-16620; D.C. No. CV-05-04188-RMW) by Alex Kozinski, Chief Judge, Sidney R. Thomas and Consuelo M. Callahan (who wrote the court’s opinion), United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Judges.

In the ban’s defense, Deputy Attorney General for the State of California, Zackery Morazzini has contended that “if governments restrict the sale of pornography to minors, it should also create a separate category for ultra-violent video games.” Edmund Gerald “Jerry” Brown, Jr., California Attorney General, has also argued that “the Court should analyze the Act’s restrictions under what has been called the ‘variable obscenity’ or ‘obscenity as to minors’ standard first mentioned in Ginsberg, 390 U.S. 629. The Court’s reasoning in Ginsberg that a state could prohibit the sale of sexually-explicit material to minors that it could not ban from distribution to adults should be extended to materials containing violence.”

The “Fallo” or dispositive portion of the judgment in question goes as follows:

We hold that the Act, as a presumptively invalid contentbased restriction on speech, is subject to strict scrutiny and not the “variable obscenity” standard from Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U.S. 629 (1968). Applying strict scrutiny, we hold that the Act violates rights protected by the First Amendment because the State has not demonstrated a compelling interest, has not tailored the restriction to its alleged compelling interest, and there exist less-restrictive means that would further the State’s expressed interests. Additionally, we hold that the Act’s labeling requirement is unconstitutionally compelled speech under the First Amendment because it does not require the disclosure of purely factual information; but compels the carrying of the State’s controversial opinion. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Plaintiffs and its denial of the State’s cross-motion. Because we affirm the district court on these grounds, we do not reach two of Plaintiffs’ challenges to the Act: first, that the language of the Act is unconstitutionally vague, and, second, that the Act violates Plaintiffs’ rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.—”Video Software Dealers Association; Entertainment Software Association v. Arnold Schwarzenegger and George Kennedy” – No. 07-16620; D.C. No. CV-05-04188-RMW – Alex Kozinski, Chief Judge, Sidney R. Thomas and

Consuelo M. Callahan, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Circuit Judges.

“We need to help empower parents with the ultimate decision over whether or not their children play in a world of violence and murder,” said the law’s author, Sen. Leland Yee, announcing he wanted Edmund Gerald “Jerry” Brown, Jr., the current Attorney General and a former governor of the State of California, to appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.

“Letting the industry police itself is like letting kids sign their own report cards and that a self regulating system simply doesn’t work. I’ve always contended that the … law the governor signed was a good one for protecting children from the harm from playing these ultra-violent video games. I’ve always felt it would end up in the Supreme Court,” Sen. Yee explained. “In fact, the high court recently agreed, in Roper v. Simmons (2005), that we need to treat children differently in the eyes of the law due to brain development,” he added.

According to Michael D. Gallagher, president of the Entertainment Software Association, plaintiff, the Court’s ruling has stressed that parents, with assistance from the industry, are the ones who should control what games their children play. “This is a clear signal that in California and across the country, the reckless pursuit of anti-video game legislation like this is an exercise in wasting taxpayer money, government time and state resources,” Gallagher said in a statement.

California’s violent video game law properly seeks to protect children from the harmful effects of excessively violent, interactive video games. While I am deeply disappointed in today’s ruling, we should not stop our efforts to assist parents in keeping these harmful video games out of the hands of children.

Entertainment Software Association members include Disney Interactive Studios, Electronic Arts, Microsoft Corp, THQ Inc, Sony Computer Entertainment America, and Take-Two Interactive Software, the maker of “Grand Theft Auto” games.

Judge Callahan has also reprimanded state lawyers for having failed to show any reasonable alternatives to an outright statewide ban against the ultra-violent video games. “Ratings education, retailer ratings enforcement, and control of game play by parents are the appropriate responses to concerns about video game content,” said Bo Andersen, president and chief executive of the Entertainment Merchants Association.

Andersen continues, “retailers are committed to assisting parents in assuring that children do not purchase games that are not appropriate for their age. Independent surveys show that retailers are doing a very good job in this area, with an 80 percent enforcement rate, and retailers will continue to work to increase enforcement rates even further; the court has correctly noted that the state cannot simply dismiss these efforts.”

California was already forced to pay $282,794 to the ESA for attorneys’ fees, money that would’ve helped with the state’s current budget difficulties. Andersen has urged California government officials not to appeal the case. “The estimated $283,000 in taxpayer money spent by the state on this case is so far an ‘ill-advised, and ultimately doomed, attempt at state-sponsored nannyism.’ A voluntary ratings system already exists to avoid the state-sponsored nannyism of a ban,” he explained.

“The governor believes strongly we have a responsibility to our children and our communities to protect against the effects of video games depicting ultra-violent actions,” said Governor Schwarzenegger spokeswoman Camille Anderson adding the governor was reviewing Friday’s decision.

Deputy Attorney General Zackery Morazzini, the state’s counsel in the appealed case, has stressed that “a law restricting sales of violent games is far more effective than industry self-policing, since the technological controls that the court cited as another alternative can be easily bypassed by any kid with an Internet connection.”

According to Jim Steyer, Founder of Common Sense Media, a non-profit organization of 750,000 regular users dedicated to improving children’s media lives, researches have shown that playing these violent video games are detrimental for kids mental and physical health. “The health threat involved with kids playing such games is equivalent to smoking cigarettes,” Steyer said. “These violent video games are learning tools for our children and clearly result in more aggressive behavior,” said Randall Hagar, California Psychiatric Association’s Director of Government Affairs.

The Federal Trade Commission‘s data reveals that “nearly 70 percent of thirteen to sixteen year olds are able to purchase M-rated (Mature) video games, which are designed for adults; ninety-two percent of children play video or computer games, of which about forty percent are rated M, which are the fastest growing segment of the 10 billion-dollar video game industry; the top selling games reward players for killing police officers, maiming elderly persons, running over pedestrians and committing despicable acts of murder and torture upon women and racial minorities.”

California’s violent video game ban law ruled unconstitutional by US Court of Appeals

Filed Under (Uncategorized) by on 07-08-2017

Sunday, February 22, 2009

A U.S. Court of Appeals on Friday has declared unconstitutional California Assembly Bills 1792 & 1793, the California “ultraviolent video games law” that sought to ban the sale or rental of violent video games to minors.

Federal judge Consuelo M. Callahan has ruled that the 2005 statewide ban, which has yet to be enforced, violates minors’ rights under the US Constitution’s First and 14th amendment because even the most graphic on-screen mayhem, video game content represents free speech that cannot be censored without proper justification.

The Court has ruled that there’s no convincing evidence it causes psychological damage to young people. The 3-0 judgment has affirmed an earlier ruling by a U.S. District Court, which barred enforcement of the law on the basis that it was “unduly restrictive” and “used overly broad definitions,” and that the state failed to show that the limitations on violent video games would actually protect children.

In 2005, Leland Yee (???), a California State Senator (in District 8 which includes the western half of San Francisco and most of San Mateo County), Speaker pro Tempore of the Assembly (D-San Francisco/Daly City), introduced California Assembly Bills 1792 & 1793 which barred “ultra-violent” video games from minors under the age of eighteen in California and mandated the application of ESRB ratings for video games.

“California Assembly Bills 1792 & 1793” were commonly called the “ultraviolent video games bills” or simply “video game ban” bills. Bill 1792 banned the sales of such video games while Bill 1793 required signs explaining the regulations on said games to be placed where such were sold. Both bills were passed by the Assembly and signed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger into law (AB 1179) on October 7, 2005.

Explicitly, these two bills provided that:

  • AB 1792 will place ultra-violent video games into the “matter” portion of the penal code, which criminalizes the sale of said material to a minor.
  • AB 1793 will require retailers to place M-rated games separate from other games intended for children, and will also require retailers to display signage explaining the ESRB rating system.

Yee, a former child psychologist has publicly criticized such games as Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas and Manhunt 2, and opposes the U.S. Army’s Global Gaming League.

On October 17, 2005, before the effectivity of the challenged Act, plaintiffs Video Software Dealers Association, the not-for-profit international trade association dedicated to advancing the interests of the $32 billion home entertainment industry and Entertainment Software Association, a 1994 US trade association of the video game industry have filed lawsuit (D.C. No. CV-05-04188-RMW) against the defendants Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, CA Attorney General, Edmund G. Brown, Santa Clara County District Attorney George Kennedy, City Attorney for the City of San Jose, Richard Doyle, and County Counsel for the County of Santa Clara, Ann Miller Ravel.

Plaintiffs’ counsel, Jenner & Block‘s Paul M. Smith has filed a declaratory relief to invalidate the newly-enacted California Civil Code sections 1746-1746.5 (the “Act”), on the grounds that it allegedly violated 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the First and Fourteenth Amendments.

Plaintiffs have submitted that “the Act unconstitutionally curtailed freedom of expression on its face based on content regulation and the labeling requirement, was unconstitutionally vague, and violated equal protection. California’s restrictions could open the door for states to limit minors’ access to other material under the guise of protecting children.”

By December 2005, both bills had been struck down as unconstitutional, by Ronald M. Whyte, District Judge, Presiding in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in San Jose, thereby preventing either from going into effect on January 1, 2006.

Judge Whyte has granted plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction in “Video Software Dealers Ass’n v. Schwarzenegger,” 401 F. Supp. 2d 1034 (N.D. Cal. 2005), and cross-motions for summary judgment, in “Video Software Dealers Ass’n v. Schwarzenegger,” No. C-05-04188, slip op. (N.D. Cal. Aug. 6, 2007).

Similar bills were subsequently filed in such states as Illinois, Oklahoma, Minnesota, Michigan and Louisiana have been ruled to be unconstitutional by federal courts on First Amendment grounds, according to Sean Bersell, a spokesman for the Entertainment Merchants Association.

The defendants, in the instant Case No. 07-16620, have timely appealed the judgment. On October 29, 2008, the appealed case was argued and submitted to the Sacramento, California‘s U.S. Court of Appeals, hence, the promulgation of the instant 30 pages decision (No. 07-16620; D.C. No. CV-05-04188-RMW) by Alex Kozinski, Chief Judge, Sidney R. Thomas and Consuelo M. Callahan (who wrote the court’s opinion), United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Judges.

In the ban’s defense, Deputy Attorney General for the State of California, Zackery Morazzini has contended that “if governments restrict the sale of pornography to minors, it should also create a separate category for ultra-violent video games.” Edmund Gerald “Jerry” Brown, Jr., California Attorney General, has also argued that “the Court should analyze the Act’s restrictions under what has been called the ‘variable obscenity’ or ‘obscenity as to minors’ standard first mentioned in Ginsberg, 390 U.S. 629. The Court’s reasoning in Ginsberg that a state could prohibit the sale of sexually-explicit material to minors that it could not ban from distribution to adults should be extended to materials containing violence.”

The “Fallo” or dispositive portion of the judgment in question goes as follows:

We hold that the Act, as a presumptively invalid contentbased restriction on speech, is subject to strict scrutiny and not the “variable obscenity” standard from Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U.S. 629 (1968). Applying strict scrutiny, we hold that the Act violates rights protected by the First Amendment because the State has not demonstrated a compelling interest, has not tailored the restriction to its alleged compelling interest, and there exist less-restrictive means that would further the State’s expressed interests. Additionally, we hold that the Act’s labeling requirement is unconstitutionally compelled speech under the First Amendment because it does not require the disclosure of purely factual information; but compels the carrying of the State’s controversial opinion. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Plaintiffs and its denial of the State’s cross-motion. Because we affirm the district court on these grounds, we do not reach two of Plaintiffs’ challenges to the Act: first, that the language of the Act is unconstitutionally vague, and, second, that the Act violates Plaintiffs’ rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.—”Video Software Dealers Association; Entertainment Software Association v. Arnold Schwarzenegger and George Kennedy” – No. 07-16620; D.C. No. CV-05-04188-RMW – Alex Kozinski, Chief Judge, Sidney R. Thomas and

Consuelo M. Callahan, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Circuit Judges.

“We need to help empower parents with the ultimate decision over whether or not their children play in a world of violence and murder,” said the law’s author, Sen. Leland Yee, announcing he wanted Edmund Gerald “Jerry” Brown, Jr., the current Attorney General and a former governor of the State of California, to appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.

“Letting the industry police itself is like letting kids sign their own report cards and that a self regulating system simply doesn’t work. I’ve always contended that the … law the governor signed was a good one for protecting children from the harm from playing these ultra-violent video games. I’ve always felt it would end up in the Supreme Court,” Sen. Yee explained. “In fact, the high court recently agreed, in Roper v. Simmons (2005), that we need to treat children differently in the eyes of the law due to brain development,” he added.

According to Michael D. Gallagher, president of the Entertainment Software Association, plaintiff, the Court’s ruling has stressed that parents, with assistance from the industry, are the ones who should control what games their children play. “This is a clear signal that in California and across the country, the reckless pursuit of anti-video game legislation like this is an exercise in wasting taxpayer money, government time and state resources,” Gallagher said in a statement.

California’s violent video game law properly seeks to protect children from the harmful effects of excessively violent, interactive video games. While I am deeply disappointed in today’s ruling, we should not stop our efforts to assist parents in keeping these harmful video games out of the hands of children.

Entertainment Software Association members include Disney Interactive Studios, Electronic Arts, Microsoft Corp, THQ Inc, Sony Computer Entertainment America, and Take-Two Interactive Software, the maker of “Grand Theft Auto” games.

Judge Callahan has also reprimanded state lawyers for having failed to show any reasonable alternatives to an outright statewide ban against the ultra-violent video games. “Ratings education, retailer ratings enforcement, and control of game play by parents are the appropriate responses to concerns about video game content,” said Bo Andersen, president and chief executive of the Entertainment Merchants Association.

Andersen continues, “retailers are committed to assisting parents in assuring that children do not purchase games that are not appropriate for their age. Independent surveys show that retailers are doing a very good job in this area, with an 80 percent enforcement rate, and retailers will continue to work to increase enforcement rates even further; the court has correctly noted that the state cannot simply dismiss these efforts.”

California was already forced to pay $282,794 to the ESA for attorneys’ fees, money that would’ve helped with the state’s current budget difficulties. Andersen has urged California government officials not to appeal the case. “The estimated $283,000 in taxpayer money spent by the state on this case is so far an ‘ill-advised, and ultimately doomed, attempt at state-sponsored nannyism.’ A voluntary ratings system already exists to avoid the state-sponsored nannyism of a ban,” he explained.

“The governor believes strongly we have a responsibility to our children and our communities to protect against the effects of video games depicting ultra-violent actions,” said Governor Schwarzenegger spokeswoman Camille Anderson adding the governor was reviewing Friday’s decision.

Deputy Attorney General Zackery Morazzini, the state’s counsel in the appealed case, has stressed that “a law restricting sales of violent games is far more effective than industry self-policing, since the technological controls that the court cited as another alternative can be easily bypassed by any kid with an Internet connection.”

According to Jim Steyer, Founder of Common Sense Media, a non-profit organization of 750,000 regular users dedicated to improving children’s media lives, researches have shown that playing these violent video games are detrimental for kids mental and physical health. “The health threat involved with kids playing such games is equivalent to smoking cigarettes,” Steyer said. “These violent video games are learning tools for our children and clearly result in more aggressive behavior,” said Randall Hagar, California Psychiatric Association’s Director of Government Affairs.

The Federal Trade Commission‘s data reveals that “nearly 70 percent of thirteen to sixteen year olds are able to purchase M-rated (Mature) video games, which are designed for adults; ninety-two percent of children play video or computer games, of which about forty percent are rated M, which are the fastest growing segment of the 10 billion-dollar video game industry; the top selling games reward players for killing police officers, maiming elderly persons, running over pedestrians and committing despicable acts of murder and torture upon women and racial minorities.”

Free Software Foundation releases first draft of GPLv3

Filed Under (Uncategorized) by on 07-08-2017

Monday, January 16, 2006

The Free Software Foundation released the first draft for the next version of the GNU General Public License at the International Public Conference for GPLv3 in Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, today. The revisions mark the first changes to the GPL since the second version was released in 1991.

According to Richard M. Stallman, the president of the Free Software Foundation, the most significant change to the license are changes to allow GPLv3 to be compatible with other popular free software licenses, notably the Apache Software License 2.0 and the Eclipse license. A second significant change, according to Stallman, is the addition of a clause prohibiting the use of GPL software for Digital rights management (DRM), “something for which there can never be toleration.”

As of noon EST today, the license is available in draft form on the Free Software Foundation’s website. The conference about the license, which continues now and into Tuesday, is being held in Building 10, Room 250, on the campus of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Approximately 200 people attended the morning session of the conference, during which Eben Moglen gave what he called a “quick” 90 minute overview of the license changes.

This article features first-hand journalism by Wikinews members. See the collaboration page for more details.
This article features first-hand journalism by Wikinews members. See the collaboration page for more details.

While Moglen’s presentation covered a great deal of legal detail, it was not without levity. When the cell phone of Dave Turner, an FSF staff member sitting in the front row, rang during Moglen’s speech, Stallman broke in, requesting of the audience, “If you have brought in a portable tracking and surveillance device, you should turn it off,” before making other remarks about the police.

The crowd at the conference included a large number of free software celebrities, including Bruce Perens, Andrew Tridgell, and Chris diBona. According to Wikinews reporter Brandon Stafford, it seemed that IBM and Sun were the corporations with the most employees present. Representing the companies were Bob Sutor, Craig Cook, and Mark Brown from IBM and Simon Phipps and Doug Johnson from Sun. Also in attendance were representatives from Intel, Redhat, MySQL AB, Hitachi, and Qualcomm, among others.