Key bf2 patch 1.5 gamershell patches

The list below contains all the news for this week on games entering or in their testing phase. This is released on Friday due to many game companies having their testing phases over the weekend.

Article	Genre
29/6/13
The Shadow Sun currently in beta	MMORPG
League of Legends releases Oceanic beta servers	MOBA
-	-
1/7/13
Gundog enters open beta	TPS
-	-
2/7/13
Trideck opens registrations for closed beta	TCG
-	-
3/7/13
Wildstar talks about the modding scene in its beta	MMORPG
A million registrations for FFXIV	MMORPG
World of Warplanes in open beta	Flight Sim
ConquerX2 in closed beta	Stratergy (BB)
Mirror Moon extended edition pre-order and closed beta access coming soon	Adventure
-	-
4/7/13
SkullGirls PC beta for IndieGoGo backers	Fighter
Dragons Prophet content update brings new level cap, home and dungeons	MMORPG
-	-
Last Weeks Update

This weeks recommendation is the trading card game Trideck. Currently on kickstarter, Trideck will be a multiplatform TCG that will release first on mobile devices for free.

Well first off, this question was inspired by ysalimiri's reply to this thread, which discussed emulators and copyright.
Second, let's keep the discussion on how appropriately current copyright laws apply to videogames, why they should/shouldn't remain the same, and other discussions along this line. Don't let the discussion dissolve into bitching about any non-gaming issues simply for the sake of bitching. If you want to talk about copyright as a whole, go to /copyright.
Thirdly, here's what I have to say about applying copyright lifespans to videogames:
It seems a bit strange that we apply the same copyright to videogames that we apply to literature and music. Think about it; copyright's original intention, as mattahorn explains, is to "promote science and arts. It does this by granting the creator the temporary exclusive rights to profit from their work, which incentivizes creation. So, while it does allow for a creator to profit from his work for a period of time, that isn't what it is there for."
I had originally stated that copyright's was originally intended to "let the creator of a work profit from said work, while allowing it to be released in to the public domain". Since the majority of my post revolves around that incorrect idea, I'm not going to altar any of my points. Make sure to keep this in mind when reading rest of my post.
Today, works produced by corporations are protected for the creator's life plus seventy, as solomute explains, ninety-five years. This is more then enough time for a creator to profit from a work. While over seventy years is a long time to wait for a work to be released into the public domain, it isn't entirely unreasonable; acclaimed works such as 1984 will be released to the public domain in 2020, and readers may still be able to take away a powerful experience.
Now, let's think about games for a moment. Think about the lifetime of a game versus the lifetime of a book. In 2013, nobody is going to claim a twenty-year old book is "unreadable" because of the book's now-archaic language and style. However, with games, twenty years is a colossal interval of time.
To prove this, let's compare the graphics of Doom to those of Dishonored. There's a major difference in the graphics and aesthetics (the style) of both games, and by extension, the quality of the experience they provide to gamers today. Believe it or not, but it seems like most people would probably choose to play Dishonored over Doom. Most people are probably going to state that if Doom was first released in 2012, it wouldn't be as fun to play as Dishonored!
The fact of the matter is that currently, games age much more quickly than literature. They have a much shorter period of time to provide a powerful experience, in direct contrast with works of literature, which can provide powerful experiences to readers decades after such works are released.
Despite this, we apply the same blanket copyright lifespan to games that we apply to literature, and this only makes sense if both forms of entertainment age equally, if both forms of entertainment have the same lifespan to sell copies.
This sort of copyright law restricts "antique" games from being legally released to the public domain. Developers/producers can release these "dead" games to the public domain whenever they damn well please. Before they choose to do so, consumers are restricted access to games that no longer earn a profit, and other companies are restricted from legally producing a copy of the game under their own terms, which reduces the platforms "dead" games can be released upon.
Yes, there are games that can be considered timeless, so yes, developers could still earn a profit from a 20 year-old game, and gamer can still have a powerful experience. However, the disparity between a game released in 1993 vs. a game released in 2012 are gigantic. Retaining a copyright on Pokemon Red is not the same as retaining the copyright for A Game of Thrones; A Song of Ice and Fire, despite both being released in 1996. Take a quick guess at how many copies Pokemon Red has sold in 2012 in comparison to A Game of Thrones. Take a quick guess at how much money Nintendo would have lost from sales of Pokemon Red if the game was released into the public domain.
I'm not saying that the characters of a game have a short lifespan. Hell, if you want an example of this, look no further than any game Nintendo has released in the past twenty years. Mario's been saving Peach for over two decades, and he's probably going to be doing so for years to come. However, Super Mario Brother for the NES still hasn't be released to the public domain, despite being released 28 years ago. What is the justification for Nintendo still holding the copyright to Super Mario Bros (NES)? How does this copyright "protect" Nintendo's sales of the game, while allowing it to be released into the public domain?
Tl;dr and conclusion; It seems that the length of time for a game's copyright to expire is far too long. Gaming changes and vidoegames "die" far more quickly than works in other forms of entertainment, such as literature. Because of this, it makes little sense that the copyright for videogames take such a long time to expire.