Capcom Can't Give Straight Answer On SOPA

Earlier this week, according to Digital Trends, a Capcom spokesperson was asked for the company's position on the Stop Online Piracy Act. "The ESA represents us on these matters," was the reply. The ESA supports SOPA. Applying the transitive property, that means Capcom supports SOPA.

Not so, says Christian Svensson, who blamed "bad journalism" for the inference that the publisher supports SOPA. "We've only ever stated that the ESA represents us in legislative matters (again, like every other publisher). We have not stated any stance on our support (or not) for SOPA. Inferring more than that is bad journalism."

Fine, then. Hiding behind your lobbyist and pretending to state a position on an issue of extreme interest to your customers, when asked a direct question by a legitimate news agency, is a "cop-out".

Why Capcom USA Support SOPA and IP Protection? [Capcom-Unity, via Game Politics]


Comments

    If you're with the ESA you support SOPA. In the US if someone in a car with you has drugs on them, then you're just as guilty as they are. Even if you do NOT agree with that, it's the law. So, if Capcom wants to say "We don't support it but we support the ESA" then you support it. Done and done.

      ah terrible analogy. The person carrying the stuff gets in trouble not everyone in the car

        Laws are currently being put in place in Australia so that the passenger is now accountable for the driver's crimes.

        And yes ignorance is no defense.

          Unless you're a cop yourself, in which case ignorance seems to be a great defence. Such as, "I didn't know that adolescent wasn't reaching for a weapon when I shot him".

    Umm... no. If the ESA represents you and you state "The ESA represents us in this matter" then you are acknowledging that the ESA determines your stance on the matter, and therefore as the ESA's stance is to support the SOPA, your stance is to support SOPA. That's not bad journalism. That's sound logic. You cannot say “The ESA represents us on these matters,” and then object when people draw the conclusion that that means you are adopting their stance on the matter without it looking like you're being an evasive tosser

    Lol Capcom. Fail more why don't ya.

    I can't say I'm shocked certain companies are difficult to pin a yes or no answer on. This proposed bill is a very big deal, and of course some companies are going to be wary of putting a black/white yes/no down for the record. Not to mention some companies are owned by other companies, and often there's some complex relations as to who represents who and so on.

    I mean, I'm not making excuses for companies lacking the backbone to commit to a stance on this, but it's far from a simple matter.

    I vehemently oppose SOPA, but at the same time, I won't get dirty on every company that supports it - I can see why many companies would.

    Svensson it's amazing you're so obviously so corrupt. Yes, your lobbyist DOES represent you, as you *said* so. SO YOU AGREE WITH WHAT THEY SAY. If you REALLY don't agree with SOPA, SAY IT. Get out of the ESA. Do NOT give non-answers that actually are clear support for SOPA while insulting the people who tell your customers how good your products are. As a Capcom fan for over twenty years, I'm happy to say you're an idiot, and if Capcom agrees with SOPA then I stop buying from Capcom. It's that simple.

    hmm, Capcom.. Are they still relevant?

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now