A University of Michigan economics professor was recently brought in as an expert witness in a class-action lawsuit filed by a pair of gamers that accuses Electronic Arts of using its exclusive licensing deal with the NFL to muscle Madden NFL competitor NFL 2K out of the picture. Dr. Jeffrey MacKie-Mason alleged that EA overcharged those who bought Madden games between US$ 701 million and US$ 926 million from 2006 through 2009. Big numbers there, but analyst Michael Pachter thinks it's nothing more than horse manure.

Previously, we reported on a study done by a research team from Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, and Michigan State University. In that study, it was determined that violent games were more popular among kids. Now, here's an update to that: it's now said that violent games could actually be healthy for kids!

Published in the Journal of Adolescent Health, it's been said that violent games don't necessarily lead to violence among children and that they (the kids) could actually benefit from playing video games.

Massachusetts General Hospital's Cheryl Olson SC.D. commented that "this idea that 'M' rated games cause shootings or major violence just doesn't hold water."

One portion of the study focused on the actual benefits, with anger management being one possible factor on why it's healthy. Olson continues, "We don't know whether playing to get anger out is a good thing or a bad thing for any individual child, but we suspect that it might be healthy for a lot of kids."

Another benefit: social interaction. The study found that the kids are more likely to be playing with a couple of friends in tow, whether in the same room or over the net. In their study, none of the kids fell into the "solitary violent gamer up in his room" stereotype.

Do note that these findings are based on a focus group of 1,200 seventh and eight graders. And from what we know about focus groups (no matter how large), they still tend to be too limited to make a general theory out of - there's still some room for allowance here. So, the researchers still suggest constant vigilance among the parents, and that they should be aware of the types of games their kids play, nonetheless.

The conclusion, though, from Olson rests:

It's not going to ruin them, they're not going to go out and pick up a gun. Violent video game play is typical and normal for kids nowadays. That doesn't mean that parents have to like it, but they shouldn't panic about it

Now how's that for a safe, clean answer? We're not trying to recommend violent games to kids here. We're just saying that, hey!, it's normal.

Nowadays, despite people zealously "protecting" children from exposure to violence, more and more kids are getting exposed anyway. The hard fact is this: the youth are getting their fix of violence from different media - especially movies as well as video games - and they like it.

A new study, published in the Journal of Adolescent Health, tried to find out how popular or widespread violent video games are among American children. A research team from Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital and Michigan State University surveyed a total of 1,254 students hailing from Pennsylvania and South Carolina, ages ranging from 12-14 years old.

The results of the study will probably make Jack Thompson weep. Most of the boys, as well as girls, have played ESRB-rated Mature games, with the boys mostly playing Grand Theft Auto and Halo. Girls also played Grand Theft Auto, with the game even coming in as the second most played game by girls.

About 60 percent of the children studied agreed with the statement "I play electronic games because there's nothing else to do." While over half of the boys who participated in the study agreed that "I play electronic games because I like guns and weapons."

While parents and other authorities who claim that they intend only the best for the children, it should be noted that apart from video games, there are other sources of violence that can be found almost anywhere. The latest Die Hard movie, for instance, is rated PG-13 and yet, it's chock-full of violent scenes.

So what do you think? Should the authorities lighten up on video games?

If you're looking to sell some of your used video games these days, you may want to make sure you have a clean record. Police in Taylor, Michigan are looking into the possibility of making retailers take down the pertinent information of second-hand sellers.

The reasoning behind it is simple: to keep thieves from peddling their stolen wares through retailers. Said Taylor police chief Jac Desrosiers, "We're doing this because there are instances where those type of items are stolen from homes, and we want to make it harder for thieves."

The statute, which was already filed yesterday, could result in US$ 500 fines and prison time for retailers who don't comply with it.

Fresh after the defeat of the anti-violent games act in Louisiana, the local U.S. district court ordered the state to pay back the Electronic Software Association the US$ 91,000 that the organization spent on legal bills to fight HB 1381 which sought to ban minors from purchasing gory games.

Judge James Brady issued the court order after he ruled the state bill as unconstitutional in November of last year after months of legal proceedings. The bill was successfully passed by state legislators but the law was not fully enacted because of an injunction issued by the district court.

Brady called the bill "tenuous and speculative," pointing out that the bill lacked backing from a social science standpoint. He also said that the law may have "a chilling effect on both video game developers and retailers."

In the same manner, Michigan was also ordered by a district court to pay the ESA US$ 182,349 for legal fees used in the domestic battle to have the ant-game law scrapped. Like the Louisiana bill, the Michigan statute was scrapped.

While HR1531, better known as the Video Game Decency Act, is still going through review in Congress, Michigan Congressman Fred Upton declared that the bill was a way for the legislative body to restore parental faith on the ratings system currently used on games.

As the bill's sponsor, he explained that the bill was being reviewed to prevent developers and publishers from withholding questionable content from the ESRB. The bill is supposed to introduce a form of discipline for the game industry from bending around the rating system that parents have been unwilling to trust since the 2005 Hot Coffee scandal.

But what about the game industry's freedom? Rights activists and gamers alike were quick to question the motives of the bill - which is having to police even the game development process and the content that eventually get shipped to retail stores. Upton reassured the public that the bill was "written under the strict guidelines of the Constitution."

That aside, Upton believes that the FTC should be empowered with the ability to punish game developers and publishers who sneak age-inappropriate content past the ratings system. However, he seems to be partial to the Rockstar Games' claim of "it was the HaXorZ, we tell you!" In fact, he mentioned:

It is unfortunate that a few bad players have tarnished the integrity of the ratings system. The Federal Trade Commission currently does not have the tools necessary to pursue game makers who maliciously deceive consumers - this legislation will change that, and parents will be able to have faith in the ratings system once again.

The U.S. Department of Education has released the results of a study they conducted regarding the impact of educational software on a student's performance in school, and the results are not good. They have concluded that educational software "has no significant impact on student performance".

The study, which involved 15 reading and math-related software, had a test group of 9,424 students from 132 different schools during the 2004 to 2005 school term. The students were evaluated using standardized tests, and the reports showed that there was no significant statistical difference between students who used the software and those who didn't.

Katherin McLane, a spokeswoman for the Department of Education, spoke on this matter, and expressed her concern that "the technology that we have today isn't being utilized as effectively as it can be to raise student achievement."

The study is being played down by officials from the educational software industry, and they are now questioning the training of those who conducted the experiment along with the execution of the study. Mark Schneiderman, the director of educational policy at the Software and Information Industry Association which represents 150 companies producing educational software, said that previous experiments have shown that educational software works. He did give a concession though, adding that the previously conducted tests were not as large or intensive as the government's study.

A professor of educational technology at the University of Michigan, Elliot Solloway, spoke out in support of educational programs. He pointed out that it wasn't simply a problem with the software. He said that teachers need to better training if they expect to see results. Solloway also stressed that it would take more than one year before any noticeable effects can be seen from using educational software.

He has expressed concern regarding the effect of this study on the adaptation of educational software by school districts. He elaborated on this by saying that "It is the poor kids who will suffer, because it is their schools who will not get technology because of this study."

A new bill that mirrors one from last year has been proposed by Michigan congressman Fred Upton. Upton filed H.R. 1531, or the Video Game Decency Act of 2007, late last week.

This piece of federal legislation will make it illegal for game developers to hide content in the hope of gaining a less restrictive ESRB rating.

According to GamePolitics, the bill has been referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, of which Upton is a member. Upton was also one of the major critics who raised their voices against the Hot Coffee scandal. Part of H.R. 1531 reads like this:

It shall be unlawful... to... distribute... any video game that contains a rating label... for that video game where the person, with  the intent of obtaining a less restrictive age-based content rating, failed to disclose content of the video game that was required to be disclosed to the independent ratings organization...

Upton's original 2006 bill was designed to give the FTC "the authority to impose civil penalties."

Next generation reports that the state of Michigan has been ordered to pay the game industry over US$ 180,000 in legal fees associated with a failed video game law.

If you're memory is sharp, you'll recall that way back in April when Judge Steeh struck down the law, Saying that the proposed measure was "discriminating against a disfavored 'newcomer' in the world of entertainment media."

Well, Judge George Carem Steeh has recently ruled that the state is required to pay-back the money that the game industry spent fighting a game law that was supposedly meant to ban the sale and rental of violent videogames to minors. The legislation was found unconstitutional as it infringed on First Amendment rights.

This is another notch in the ESA win belt. Illinois has been ordered to pay the industry US$ 510,000; Washington state US$ 344,000; St. Louis US$ 180,000; Indianapolis US$ 318,000; and Michigan US$ 128,000.

As much as we don't want 8 year olds to get high on GTA, and discover the joys of puberty via extreme beach volleyball, bans are far from being the only solution.