Not that you're asking me here, but I work for Atari myself. It's not unreasonable for people in the industry to be investors in the industry and also post here; austin himself implies he's in the industry or has been.
As to EA they are still an independant 3rd party publisher / developer; that has never changed. You should probably go back and look at the platforms they've developed for during from inception to now; it's a huge list that was never made up of only Sega and Nintendo. Of course once both the PC market and console market shrunk starting in the late 80's they developed on less platforms (pc or console), but that had nothing to do with being or not being a 3rd party.
Think of 2nd party as a independant 3rd party who is married to a particular publisher or console manufacturer. In Rare's case they were independant and married to Nintendo. Contracts are involved, usually. However, if Microsoft buys Rare (as they did) and continue to publish Rare developed properties under the Rare brand that is all it is; a brand and a studio within the games division of Microsoft. Make sense? I can think of no instances where a 2nd party is wholey owned by another pub. or dev., regardless of what austin says a 2nd party is.