"While I haven't agreed with much of what he has said in the past, he alone among legislators was responsible for effecting non-legislative change in our business and he did it with a lot of class, I might add" Halpin said.

Halpin said that comes from a meeting with Lieberman back when Halpin headed the Interactive Entertainment Merchants Association, the one in which Lieberman asked retailers to card for mature purposes, and Halpin's group agreed. "The IEMA retailers saw that as the gold standard and met the challenge head-on and reacted quickly and efficiently – changing the way in which games were sold, forever," Halpin said.

You might resent some of the things Lieberman has said about the cultural value of video games, but Halpin's right, non-legislative, self-policed solutions are definitely preferable to nothing and, if effective, can ward off future regulatory attempts (especially at the state level) by arguing they're redundant to what's already in place. (In addition to the larger censorship arguments).

Also in the interview, Halpin weighs in on everyone's favorite hot-button topic of late, the resale of used games.

I understand the concerns that developer friends of mine have about not getting a second bite of the apple, a phrase they borrow from their filmmaking counterparts. In the movie business, they produce a theatrical version and then DVD, Blu-ray, Video on Demand (VoD), PSP and pay-per-view versions… hence second (and more) bites at the apple. With games as media, there’s often only a single swipe opportunity. They don’t view multiple platforms, or SKUs, as multiple bites. They just see rental and used as businesses in which they don’t get to participate. And while I understand and appreciate their perspective – having debated the subject on countless trade show panels and with developer friends – I’m still not convinced that rental and used are bad for the sector. We’ve witnessed how rental has provided a low-cost venue for people to try before you buy; same for used. We’ve also used those two distribution outlets to show investors and analysts that we’re relatively recession-proof BECAUSE they exist as low cost entry points for consumers. It seems a bit disingenuous to me that we then turn around and condemn those same outlets, after accepting the institutional investor’s money. Going forward, I’m sure that the industry will figure out ways to add value to the first sale so that it becomes less impactful though.

Decent read for a slow Sunday morning.

My Dinner with Halpin [Crispy Gamer, via GamePolitics]

The breakfast, set at a posh D.C. hotel, happened just two months to the day after Clinton took the video game industry to task for "stealing the innocence of our children" and called for a federal investigation into the discovery of hidden sex in Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas.

Now it looks like her pal Joe Lieberman, a fellow video game naysayer, has also been caught with his hand in the video game till.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Lieberman received about $73,000 from a variety of entertainment industry sources over the past two years, including Microsoft and Sony.

Asked why he accepted their money, Lieberman first joked, "I really don't get anything [contributions] from that industry."

And, he added, taking the donations "obviously doesn't affect my behavior, and the system allows for anyone who wants to see what I get to view all the donations."

Oh... that money! Brian Crecente

Lieberman Defends Video-Game Money [Hartford Courant]