The long-awaited initial public offering for Zynga 
is reality — but as some investors celebrate, others wonder whether the numbers being discussed in conjunction with the company are a sign that we’re in the middle of another Internet stock bubble.
Zynga, the maker of massively popular Facebook games like FarmVille and Mafia Wars, filed for an IPO Friday and said it plans to raise $1 billion — – a figure that is expected to go higher by the time its shares begin trading.
At long last, Zynga has 
confirmed its plans to go public.
The company on Friday filed an S-1 form with the Securities and Exchange Commission, announcing plans to raise $1 billion through publicly traded shares. That wasn’t the interesting part, though. The really fascinating stuff was in the details.
The just-started NBA 
lockout is already having far-reaching effects.
Beyond what players, coaches and team owners are going through (and, of course, fans of live games), the television industry is scrambling to find ways to fill the possible holes in their schedule. Meanwhile, video game companies are trying to determine the ramifications for some of their biggest franchises, while NBA.com webmasters have had a busy few days. Let’s break it down by industry.
The biggest company in social 
network gaming is poised to become the biggest publicly-traded company in the video game industry.
Zynga, the maker of massively popular Facebook games like FarmVille and Mafia Wars, has filed the paperwork for an Initial Public Offering, where it says it hopes to raise $1 billion. That’s lower than some investors were expecting, but is likely to increase as bankers determine the offering price and how many shares should be sold.
While the company hasn’t confirmed 
any of the whispers, everyone on Wall St. knows the Zynga IPO is coming soon.
Several news outlets this week postulated the filing could come on Wednesday, but that deadline (like so many before it) came and went. What’s taking so long?
Sony’s rearranging the executive 
structure of its PlayStation branch. Kaz Hirai, who holds the title of president and CEO, is stepping away from the group to widen his focus on the company as a whole.
Sony Computer Entertainment Europe chief Andrew House will take over those roles. (Hirai will remain involved as chairman of the group.) The switch takes place Sept. 1.
David Maisel, the former chairman and 
executive vice president of Marvel Comic’s entertainment arm, is joining the Angry Birds.
Maisel is the latest hire at Rovio, which is looking to expand its hit iPhone game into several new fields, including television and film. And given Maisel’s executive producer credits on “Iron Man” (and its sequel), “Thor,” “Captain America” and “The Incredible Hulk,” it seems to be getting more serious about film.
The Supreme Court’s ruling on Monday that 
violent videogames are a protected form of free speech comes as a relief not just to the gaming industry but to the rest of Hollywood.
The high court, in a 7-2 decision, struck down a California law that attempted to restrict the sale of violent games to minors. The industry had been closely watching the ruling because it feared that if the law were upheld, it would carve out an exemption to the First Amendment that could eventually extend to violence in movies and TV shows.
Monday’s ruling that video games are 
protected under the First Amendment was the culmination of a long fight. And the victory was clearly a solid one for the industry.
But in reading through the 90-plus page decision and dissenting opinions, there are some interesting arguments – both for the industry’s rights and those of parents. Much like the oral arguments of last November, Justices were split on the possible differences in interactive and passive forms of entertainment and the First Amendment issues at hand.
Violent video games are protected 
forms of free speech, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled today.
In a 7-2 ruling, the Court struck down a controversial California law that attempted to restrict the sale of violent games to minors.
“Video games qualify for First Amendment protection,” the Court said in its ruling, written by Justice Scalia. “Like protected books, plays, and movies, they communicate ideas through familiar literary devices and features distinctive to the medium. And ‘the basic principles of freedom of speech . . . do not vary’ with a new and different communication medium.”
Chris Morris: Journalist 