In this episode, lawyer Richard Hoeg explores the complexities of censorship on digital platforms, focusing on Steam's new rules influenced by payment processors. He discusses financial censorship, game removals, and pressure from credit card companies. The impact on digital marketplaces like itch.io and the influence of activist group Collective Shout on content policies are also examined. Hoeg addresses broader implications for free speech and democracy, antitrust limitations, and the potential role of payment processors as common carriers. The episode concludes with a discussion on consumer actions, platform responsibilities, and a call to action for viewers/listeners.

https://www.engadget.com/gaming/steam-now-bans-games-that-violate-the-rules-and-standards-of-payment-processors-and-banks-164222173.html

https://x.com/SteamDB/status/1945409792207421900

https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/gettingstarted/onboarding?language=english#5

https://www.pcgamer.com/software/platforms/valve-confirms-credit-card-companies-pressured-it-to-delist-certain-adult-games-from-steam/

https://www.pcguide.com/news/valve-responds-to-payment-processor-controversy-hopes-devs-have-another-game-to-put-on-steam/

https://www.gamefile.news/p/itchio-steam-collective-shout-sex-games-consume-me

https://itch.io/updates/update-on-nsfw-content

https://theretailexec.com/payment-processing/payment-processors/

https://civitai.com/articles/13632/policy-and-content-adjustments

https://www.pcgamer.com/gaming-industry/australian-anti-porn-group-claims-responsibility-for-steams-new-censorship-rules-in-victory-against-porn-sick-brain-rotted-pedo-gamer-fetishists-and-things-only-get-weirder-from-there/

https://www.collectiveshout.org/campaigns

https://www.collectiveshout.org/about

https://www.collectiveshout.org/faq

https://www.collectiveshout.org/media-release-payment-gateways

https://www.collectiveshout.org/open-letter-to-payment-processors

https://automaton-media.com/en/news/visa-japans-ceo-says-disabling-card-payment-for-legal-adult-content-is-necessary-to-protect-the-brand/

https://automaton-media.com/en/news/nier-creator-speaks-out-against-payment-processors-pressuring-japanese-adult-content-platforms/

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1

https://lawshun.com/article/what-is-a-common-carrier-under-federal-law

(0:14) Introduction and special request to audience

(1:13) Censorship, Steam's new rule, and payment processors

(5:44) Financial censorship and its implications

(8:08) Steam database changes and game removals

(10:16) Legal analysis of Steam's content policy changes

(15:26) Valve's confirmation of credit card company pressures

(18:13) Valve's response to payment method concerns

(21:32) Impact on itch.io and digital marketplace censorship

(24:09) Case study: Consume Me game and de-indexed games statistics

(26:03) Collective Shout's role in content crackdown

(27:07) Collective Shout's previous campaigns and influence

(28:20) Gamefile endorsement and payment processors' influence

(30:21) itch.io's statement and consumer policy reactions

(37:00) Payment processors' role and regulatory landscape

(44:59) Analysis of Collective Shout's campaigns and impact

(51:42) Corporate social responsibility in content policy

(56:57) Using payment processors for policy enforcement

(59:44) Influence of Collective Shout on platform content decisions

(1:00:19) Uncertainty around involved payment processors

(1:05:52) Payment processors' effect on free speech and democracy

(1:08:22) Antitrust limitations and common carrier concepts

(1:12:20) Discussion on payment processors as common carriers

(1:14:00) Consumer actions and platform responsibilities

(1:17:18) Addressing activist pressures and government regulation

(1:19:18) Episode summary and call to action

(1:20:27) Closing remarks and support options

In this episode, lawyer Richard Hoeg explores Nintendo's recent user agreement changes, focusing on anti-piracy measures and new prohibitions. He provides a legal analysis of user rights, legal language, and implications for parental consent and breaches. The episode also touches on public perception, copyright issues, DMCA, and potential penalties. Richard examines patent law through the Impression vs. Lexmark case and compares ownership rights between the Nintendo Switch and other systems. He underscores the importance of understanding user agreements and the need for EULA awareness, concluding with final thoughts.

https://www.gamefile.news/p/nintendo-emulation-hacking-brick-warning-terms-of-service

https://accounts.nintendo.com/term/eula/US?lang=en-US

https://web.archive.org/web/20250329190927/https://accounts.nintendo.com/term/eula/US?lang=en-US

https://www.ign.com/articles/nintendo-revises-user-agreement-and-if-you-break-it-nintendo-reserves-the-right-to-brick-your-switch

https://www.laptopmag.com/gaming/nintendo/nintendo-eula-update-can-ban-or-brick-switch-2

https://hothardware.com/news/nintendo-eula-update-brick-consoles-arbitration

https://www.instagram.com/p/DJmofHzPssV/

https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/trademark-patent-copyright

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1203

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1204

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/16pdf/15-1189_ebfj.pdf

https://www.playstation.com/en-us/legal/psn-terms-of-service/

https://www.playstation.com/en-us/legal/ps5-ssla/

https://www.microsoft.com/en-US/servicesagreement?msockid=1f7d7163a5b163ab143062bca4a4629e#14a_XboxLive

(0:14) Introduction to Nintendo's User Agreement Changes

(2:13) Nintendo's Ecosystem and Anti-Piracy Measures

(5:20) Legal Analysis of Nintendo's New Prohibitions

(8:28) User Rights and Legal Language in Nintendo's Agreement

(10:09) Parental Consent, Termination, and Agreement Breach

(18:41) Public Perception of Nintendo's Legal Changes

(20:56) Copyright, DMCA, and Legal Penalties

(25:04) Patent Law: Impression vs Lexmarks Case Study

(27:19) Console Ownership: Switch vs PlayStation Comparison

(31:30) Sony and Microsoft User Agreement Terms

(38:05) Understanding and Protecting User Rights

(39:24) Importance of EULA Awareness

(40:39) Episode Wrap-Up and Final Disclaimer

In this episode, lawyer Richard Hoeg discusses the controversy surrounding Darth Vader's AI-generated voice in Fortnite and the resulting legal actions by SAG AFTRA. He discusses the implications of AI replacing human performers and SAG AFTRA's stance on the matter. The episode includes an analysis of the National Labor Relations Act, licensing issues, and the legal distinctions between filing charges and lawsuits. Hoeg also explores potential outcomes of the NLRB's findings on the complaint and the future of AI in voice acting contracts. The episode concludes with closing remarks and a call for listener feedback.

https://www.fortnite.com/news/this-will-be-a-day-long-remembered-speak-with-darth-vader-in-fortnite

https://www.cnet.com/tech/gaming/ai-voiced-darth-vader-can-swear-say-skibidi-toilet-in-fortnite-how-to-find-it/

https://x.com/Fortnite/status/1923397890241593822

https://x.com/IGN/status/1924616331057332619

https://www.ign.com/articles/voice-actor-union-files-unfair-labor-practice-charge-over-fortnites-ai-darth-vader

https://www.sagaftra.org/sites/default/files/2025-05/Llama%20Productions%20ULP%20Charge.pdf

https://www.sagaftra.org/sites/default/files/2025-03/IMA%20Comparison%20Chart.pdf

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/29/158

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/29/157

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/29/159

(0:14) Introduction to the episode and topics

(0:41) Darth Vader in Fortnite and AI voice controversy

(2:40) SAG AFTRA's legal actions and implications

(3:22) Call for listener support and Patreon

(7:22) SAG AFTRA's stance on AI replacing human performers

(9:23) Potential outcomes of NLRB's findings on the complaint

(10:07) Legal distinctions between filings and lawsuits

(11:06) Analysis of the National Labor Relations Act and licensing issues

(16:31) Future of AI in voice acting contracts

(21:42) Closing remarks and call for listener feedback

In this episode, lawyer Richard Hoeg explores recent legal and political developments surrounding the Supreme Court's non-decision on USAID funding and related controversies. He covers the District Court's restraining order, the government's response, administrative stays, and the Supreme Court's 'decision'. Justice Alito's dissent on sovereign immunity and equitable jurisdiction is analyzed, along with discussions on irreparable harm and universal injunctions. Hoeg also touches on constitutional crises, the Impoundment Control Act, and spending authority conflicts, concluding with thoughts on the Constitutional order and engaging with the audience.

SUPPORTING THE CHANNEL

PATREON - https://www.patreon.com/VirtualLegality

STORE - https://virtuallegalityshop.myshopify.com

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-1/#article-1-section-8-clause-1

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-2/section-3/overview-of-take-care-clause

https://x.com/kyledcheney/status/1897287827324563593

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a831_3135.pdf

https://ndlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/NDL506_Bayefsky_6_06-cropped-1.pdf

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/irreparable_harm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_crisis

https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/can-a-president-refuse-to-spend-funds-approved-by-congress

https://x.com/HoegLaw/status/1894786831251657181

(0:14) Introduction to Virtual Legality and today's topics

(1:09) Supreme Court's non-decision and political controversies

(6:07) District Court's temporary restraining order and government's response

(8:50) Understanding administrative stays and the Supreme Court's new timeline

(20:46) Justice Alito's dissent on sovereign immunity and district court's enforcement

(23:37) Analysis of equitable jurisdiction, monetary relief, and legal precedents

(26:36) Irreparable harm and universal injunctions debate

(30:03) Justice Alito's full dissent and the Supreme Court's stance

(33:04) Constitutional crisis and presidential impoundment history

(37:21) Impoundment Control Act, Line Item Veto, and spending authority conflicts

(40:36) Constitutional arguments and recent presidential spending delays

(41:52) Outro, support for the channel, and call for feedback

(42:33) Potential constitutional crises and closing remarks

In this episode, lawyer Richard Hoeg discusses the recent Warner Brothers studio closures and reflects on the company's history in the video game industry, including Monolith Productions. He focuses on intellectual property issues in gaming, with references to the "No One Lives Forever" series and Monolith's Nemesis System. Richard clarifies different types of intellectual property and common misconceptions, providing legal perspectives on the studio closures and the Nemesis System patent. He explores the future of the Nemesis System, intellectual property licenses, and US Patent and Trademark Office challenges. The episode concludes with Richard's thoughts on the implications of intellectual property in gaming.

https://www.polygon.com/news/529310/warner-bros-games-monolith-productions-multiversus-studio-closure

https://kotaku.com/the-sad-story-behind-a-dead-pc-game-that-cant-come-back-1688358811

https://kotaku.com/monolith-productions-middle-earth-nemesis-system-patent-1851766437

https://www.thegamer.com/warner-bros-owns-nemesis-system-until-2035-despite-monolith-closure/

https://www.ign.com/articles/after-warner-bros-shut-down-shadow-of-mordor-developer-monolith-and-canceled-wonder-woman-fans-lament-the-wasted-potential-of-its-nemesis-system

https://www.eurogamer.net/shadow-of-mordors-brilliant-nemesis-system-is-locked-away-by-a-warner-bros-patent-until-2036-despite-studio-shutdown

https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/trademark-patent-copyright

https://x.com/BangBangClick/status/1894505752003309829

https://x.com/SynthPotato/status/1894467413502054717

https://patents.google.com/patent/US20160279522A1/en

https://www.videogameschronicle.com/features/opinion/is-warners-nemesis-patent-really-gross-im-not-sure-id-go-that-far/

https://michelsonip.com/fundamentals-of-ip-license/

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/35/102

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/35/103

https://www.theiplawblog.com/2021/03/articles/ip/how-to-challenge-a-patent-in-the-pto/

(0:14) Introduction and Warner Brothers Studio Closures

(0:49) Warner Brothers' Video Game Industry History and Monolith Productions

(3:40) Intellectual Property in Gaming: No One Lives Forever and Nemesis System

(9:09) Intellectual Property Types and Misconceptions

(14:12) Legal Perspectives on Studio Closures and the Nemesis System Patent

(19:07) Future of the Nemesis System and Reflections on Past Discussions

(22:00) Intellectual Property Licenses and USPTO Patent Issues

(26:02) Patent Challenges and Potential Outcomes for the Nemesis System

(28:17) Closing Thoughts on Intellectual Property in Gaming

(29:12) Supporting the Podcast and Final Remarks

In this episode, lawyer Richard Hoeg explores executive orders and U.S. government structure, focusing on independent agencies versus presidential control. Using Trump's executive order as a case study, he discusses the administrative state, legal controversies, and public reactions. Hoeg reviews a law article on the unitary executive theory and Chief Justice Roberts' opinion in a case changing the structure of the CFPB. He discusses the FTC, exceptions to presidential removal authority, and the impact on other agencies. The episode concludes with insights on checks and balances, congressional authority, and the limits of executive orders.

SUPPORTING THE CHANNEL

PATREON - https://www.patreon.com/VirtualLegality

STORE - https://virtuallegalityshop.myshopify.com

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/ensuring-accountability-for-all-agencies/

https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/02/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-reins-in-independent-agencies-to-restore-a-government-that-answers-to-the-american-people/

https://x.com/allenanalysis/status/1891979647145197717

https://x.com/StephenM/status/1890600757205880940

https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdf/10.1086/714860

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/necessary_and_proper_clause

https://casetext.com/case/seila-law-llc-v-consumer-financial-protection-bureau

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-executive-order-interpret-law/

https://x.com/HoegLaw/status/1890038579310830043

https://x.com/WhiteHouse/status/1892295984928993698

(0:14) Introduction to the episode

(0:39) Explanation of executive orders and U.S. government branches

(2:07) Independent agencies vs. presidential control

(3:12) Trump's executive order: language and implications

(7:03) Role of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)

(9:15) Legal interpretations, controversies, and public reactions

(13:44) Review of law article on unitary executive theory

(23:34) Chief justice Roberts' opinion and CFPB case analysis

(25:05) Historical context of the CFPB and presidential removal power

(31:05) FTC's role and the extent of executive power

(33:01) Exceptions to the president's removal authority

(35:51) Court's opinion: minimalist vs. maximalist readings

(37:33) Impact on independent agencies: FTC, FCC, SEC

(39:02) Critique of chief justice Roberts' approach

(39:28) Future of unitary executive theory

(41:44) Scope and methodology of unitary executive theory

(43:46) Necessary and proper clause implications

(46:10) Unitary executive theory vs. congressional authority

(50:18) Originalist vs. non-originalist perspectives on executive power

(1:00:02) Risks of concentrated power: importance of checks and balances

(1:03:00) Congressional authority and power delegation

(1:05:11) Limits of presidential executive orders

(1:06:15) DOJ stance on regulatory commissions and political reactions

(1:08:23) Support for Virtual Legality and public discourse importance

(1:09:23) Disclaimer and closing remarks

In this episode, lawyer Richard Hoeg delves into the complexities surrounding Roblox, its platform, and the recent scrutiny it faces. He begins with an overview of Roblox's popularity and the criticisms it has attracted. The discussion then shifts to the SEC's investigation into Roblox, explaining securities and the implications of Bloomberg's reporting on child safety. Richard also examines short selling, focusing on Hindenburg Research's report and its potential impacts on Roblox. The episode further explores user screening, COPPA implications, and the importance of transparency in ongoing investigations, concluding with closing remarks and audience engagement.

SUPPORTING THE CHANNEL

PATREON - https://www.patreon.com/VirtualLegality

STORE - https://virtuallegalityshop.myshopify.com

https://www.gamedeveloper.com/business/sec-confirms-active-and-ongoing-investigation-into-roblox

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-02-07/sec-confirms-game-service-roblox-part-of-active-investigation

https://www.foia.gov/about.html

https://www.foia.gov/

https://www.sec.gov/about

https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/rules/childrens-online-privacy-protection-rule-coppa

https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/contact/complaints

https://www.justice.gov/criminal/criminal-ceos/keeping-children-safe-online

(0:14) Introduction to the episode

(0:43) Overview of Roblox's platform, popularity, and criticisms

(2:03) SEC's investigation into Roblox and explanation of securities

(3:53) Bloomberg's reporting and child safety allegations against Roblox

(7:16) Short selling, Hindenburg Research's report, and potential impacts

(10:23) User screening, COPPA implications, and transparency in investigations

(21:11) Closing remarks and audience engagement

In this episode, lawyer Richard Hoeg explores the prospect of Microsoft/TikTok acquisition talks. He examines the TikTok ban, enforcement challenges, and network impacts. Hoeg analyzes the performative aspects of January 19th, discusses bills of attainder, and the courts' decisions on both attainder and First Amendment law. He critiques the court's reasoning, discusses TikTok's business restrictions, and debates divestiture versus confiscation. Richard also touches on the Trump administration's actions, Congressional provisions, First Amendment concerns, and the Supreme Court's role. The episode concludes with insights into Microsoft's negotiation strategy and political considerations.

SUPPORTING THE CHANNEL

YOUTUBE - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCi5RTzzeCFurWTPLm8usDkQ/

PATREON - https://www.patreon.com/VirtualLegality

STORE - https://virtuallegalityshop.myshopify.com/

https://www.reuters.com/technology/trump-says-microsoft-is-talks-acquire-tiktok-2025-01-28/

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-118publ50/pdf/PLAW-118publ50.pdf

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/bill_of_attainder

https://cases.justia.com/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/24-1113/24-1113-2024-12-06.pdf?ts=1733499080

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-656_ca7d.pdf

https://apnews.com/article/trump-tiktok-ban-da11df6d59c17e2c17eea40c4042386d

https://www.npr.org/2025/01/20/nx-s1-5268701/trump-executive-order-tiktok-ban

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/application-of-protecting-americans-from-foreign-adversary-controlled-applications-act-to-tiktok/

https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/articles/article-ii/clauses/348

https://apnews.com/article/tiktok-ban-executive-order-trump-0bbae2d2d6f102944f41bb75ad40ce69

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-brushes-tiktok-national-security-concerns-calling-50/story?id=117923145

https://blogs.microsoft.com/on-the-issues/2025/01/03/the-golden-opportunity-for-american-ai/

(0:00) Introduction and episode overview

(0:46) Microsoft and TikTok acquisition talks and Protecting Americans Act

(2:10) TikTok ban implications, enforcement, and network impact

(4:54) Performative aspects and bill of attainder analysis

(7:53) Court's decision and discussion on law's punitive nature

(9:48) Court's tests and critique of reasoning

(11:11) TikTok's business restrictions and divestiture vs. confiscation debate

(14:08) Case history, Trump administration, and executive orders

(17:10) Congressional act provisions and First Amendment considerations

(20:29) Supreme Court's decisions on TikTok's shutdown and implications

(22:06) Executive order analysis and presidential powers

(24:33) Legal challenges to non-enforcement and take care clause implications

(28:31) Enforcement discretion and Congressional conditions for TikTok

(32:26) Legal challenges to Trump's order and TikTok's potential sale

(34:09) Microsoft's negotiation role and political strategy

(37:34) Final thoughts, community engagement, and channel support

(39:33) Legal disclaimer and closing remarks

In this episode, Richard Hoeg examines the FTC's lawsuit against Genshin Impact, focusing on loot boxes and transparency. He discusses the FTC's charges, including concerns over "dark pattern tactics" and COPPA compliance, and the implications for free-to-play games. The episode explores Hoyoverse's business practices, misleading loot box disclosures, and the FTC's authority under sections 5 and 6g. Richard also addresses marketing to children, settlement terms, and the broader impact on the gaming industry, concluding with a look at internal FTC debates.

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2025/01/genshin-impact-game-developer-will-be-banned-selling-lootboxes-teens-under-16-without-parental

https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/cognosphere_complaint.pdf

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-16/chapter-I/subchapter-C/part-312

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/45

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?hl=false&edition=prelim&req=granuleid%3AUSC-prelim-title15-section46

https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/LSB/LSB10635

https://businesslaw.osbar.org/2024/12/31/federal-trade-commission-non-compete-ban-december-2024-update/

https://www.beckersasc.com/asc-news/trump-administration-likely-to-end-ftc-efforts-to-ban-noncompetes-report.html

https://www.econotimes.com/Lina-Khan-Resigns-as-FTC-Chair-Amid-Antitrust-Legacy-1699716

https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/ferguson-cognosphere-concurrence.pdf

(0:00) Introduction to the episode

(0:46) FTC lawsuit against Genshin Impact and loot boxes

(3:14) FTC's charges against Genshin Impact and transparency issues

(5:25) FTC's concerns with "dark pattern tactics" and COPPA requirements

(7:57) Implications for free-to-play games and FTC enforcement

(10:34) Jurisdiction and legal basis for FTC's case against Genshin Impact

(16:50) Specifics of COPPA rule and FTC's interpretation

(20:05) Broader implications for the gaming industry and age gates

(24:29) FTC's investigation into Hoyoverse's business practices

(31:38) Currency and loot box practices in Genshin Impact

(37:14) Hoyoverse's advertising and influencer collaborations

(39:48) Misleading disclosure of loot box odds and unfair practices

(47:31) Gaming business models and FTC's focus on children

(51:22) FTC's authority and rulemaking under section 5 and 6g

(55:50) Settlement terms and broader video game industry implications

(1:00:00) Major questions doctrine and anti-delegation concerns

(1:03:36) FTC and loot boxes, plus ban on noncompetes

(1:05:43) Andrew Ferguson's role and allegations against Cognosphere LLC

(1:07:26) Loot boxes, odds, and misleading advertising

(1:09:46) Virtual currency complexity and FTC's consumer protection stance

(1:12:21) Marketing to children and differing opinions within FTC

(1:14:23) Conclusion, viewer engagement, and disclaimer

In this episode, Richard Hoeg explores the US Department of Defense's CMC designation and its business impacts on Tencent Holdings. He covers legal background, executive orders, and insights from Bloomberg, analyzing market reactions and clarifying misunderstandings. The discussion includes the National Defense Authorization Act, Trump's executive orders, and more. Hoeg provides historical context, examines Tencent's situation, and the Department of Defense's role in US-China relations. He also considers potential actions by the future administrations and their effects on Tencent's global market presence, concluding with national security debates and possible legal proceedings.

https://www.theverge.com/2025/1/6/24337489/tencent-catl-us-defense-department-chinese-military-companies

https://archive.ph/FPpBi

https://public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2025-00070.pdf

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/12/trump-bans-investments-in-companies-that-aid-chinas-military.html

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/11/17/2020-25459/addressing-the-threat-from-securities-investments-that-finance-communist-chinese-military-companies

https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/2328894/dod-releases-list-of-additional-companies-in-accordance-with-section-1237-of-fy/

https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/chinese-military-civil-fusion-and-section-1260h-congress-incorporates-defense-contributors

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution

https://www.cmtradelaw.com/2024/02/dod-is-making-its-list-and-checking-it-twice-dod-updates-1260h-chinese-military-companies-list/

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9q78wn9g8zo

https://www.eurogamer.net/tencent-threatens-legal-proceedings-if-us-doesnt-overturn-decision-to-label-it-as-a-chinese-military-company

https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/worlds-biggest-game-publisher-tencent-threaten-to-sue-us-government-for-listing-them-as-a-chinese-military-company

https://static.www.tencent.com/uploads/2025/01/07/ed277c23e9fe0fc870fb9f02350e7658.pdf

https://www.theverge.com/2024/10/19/24274153/dji-sues-us-dod-chinese-military-company

(0:00) Introduction and overview of the topic

(1:12) US Department of Defense's designation explained and potential business impacts

(2:35) Legal background, executive orders, and Bloomberg article insights

(3:33) Market reactions, Citigroup analyst perspective, and clarification of sanctions

(5:39) Examination of William M. Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act and Federal Register details

(7:27) Trump's executive order, section 1237 vs 1260h, and legal implications

(10:22) Historical context, reporting requirements, and legislative amendments

(13:05) Definitions, implications for Tencent, and legal interpretations

(15:04) Department of Defense's discretion and implications for US-China relations

(17:23) Potential future actions by the Biden administration and Brookings Institution's perspective

(20:49) Specific prohibitions and overview of Tencent's global market presence

(22:57) Tencent's gaming investments and impact of US designation

(25:02) Clarification on the CMC list, potential legal proceedings, and DJI precedent

(30:12) US government actions, national security debate, and closing remarks