Wall Street Journal Has The Scoop On IPs
The Wall Street Journal sounds an unregistered user arguing on a video game message board. In an article about THQ takeover speculation, they gave the following insight into intellectual property:
"Take-Two has a number of strong franchises and a number of wholly owned Internet Protocols. Wholly owned IPs not only carry higher profitability, but also are more valuable to media companies because they could be adapted into movies, TV serials and online destinations."
Roflcopter.
In WSJ's defense, maybe gaming journalism has formed an impenetrable bubble of lingo ("These Wiimakes of old IPs have 1:1 and DLC", etc) and maybe WSJ is doing the best it can to present the industry news in a format that game publisher shareholders could easily understand. And maybe that's a good thing for the video game industry. But come on, how could they not even notice that the definition given in the very next sentence doesn't even remotely match up with what they said in the previous sentence? Did their fact checkers just Google "define: IPs"? Isn't that like citing Wikipedia on a term paper? Epic fail.
Why You Shouldn't Get Your Game News From The Wall Street Journal [Joystiq]
Bradamantium
Posted to Miscellany on 23 September 2009
· Comments (1)
Other stuff like this: ip, news, newspaper, Take Two, THQ, wall street journal
I think I just realized what happened... IP is also short for Intellectual Property. If you plug IP into Wikipedia, it brings back that IP is the usual abbreviation for Internet Protocol. "Wholly owned intellectual properties" makes a good bit more sense.