The E3 Experience

The tech world has turned its eyes to Los Angeles for the last week -- the site of the Electronic Entertainment Expo, the video game industry's annual gathering.

Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo took turns at E3 making news with revelations about their current and upcoming video game consoles (that's the PlayStation 3, the Xbox 360 and the Wii -- pronounced "we" -- respectively). We sent out a squad of staffers and freelance writers to chronicle the show, and they blogged up a storm.

I envy those folks, but I also pity them. I covered E3 for the first five years of its existence, and every other trade show I've been to since still can't touch E3 in several key parameters: volume of booth soundtracks, number of weirdly costumed individuals on the show floor, and degree of raw egocentricity on display. By the second E3 I covered, I realized I'd heard the phrase "Go big or go home!" enough times to last the rest of my life -- and then I went back to the show three more times.

Rigged demo follows rigged demo, your notebook fills with the we'll-smoke-the-competition puffery of PR flacks, receptions stretch the work day past midnight (if we allow a definition of "work" that includes gobbling down other people's sushi), and the noise never stops. It can really wear a guy down. Friday afternoon, Mike Musgrove posted this observation in the blog:

"This is how you know it's getting near the end of the last day of E3. You're playing a sci-fi shooter game, right? With a bunch of other people? You ask what console the game is on, and then realize something: You are holding an Xbox 360 controller. You are in Microsoft's booth."

And yet I miss covering this show. Obviously, I'm in need of some sort of professional help.

Apple Wins, Apple Loses

A week ago, one of the entertainment industry's longest, silliest legal squabbles took a big step nearer its end: Apple Corps, the record label set up by the Beatles to sell their records, lost its effort to make Apple Computer Inc. remove its apple-with-a-bite logo from its iTunes Music Store.

Until a few weeks ago, I had thought Apple Corps could have a legitimate case. But then I read the agreement the two companies signed in 1991, governing who can call themselves "Apple" while selling what, and it all fell into place: That deal explicitly allows Apple Computer to sell other people's music in digital form. It's right there in section 4.3.

The British judge based his ruling on that clause and rejected Apple Corps' claim. Apple-the-record-label said it would appeal the ruling, but I'm not sure how anybody would interpret that key clause any differently. Given that under British law, the losing party to a lawsuit must pay the winner's legal fees, Apple Corps would be smarter to quit while it's behind, make nice with Apple Computer and -- finally -- get the Beatles' music on the iTunes store.

Badvertising -- An Ongoing Look at Ill-Advised Marketing

This week's entry appeared on page A10 of The Post -- a full-page ad decrying proposed legislation that would mandate "net neutrality."