Illinois Videogame Law Moves Forward 192
The ongoing trend of legislating the sale of video games moves forward. Gamasutra has news on the Illinois law currently moving through the legislature, which apparently has "overwhelming support". From the Illinois debate: "An industry that is making so much money selling these things to your children is dealing with things like decapitation, defecation on people. There's vivid pictures of nudity. It's an industry that needs help being policed..."
Re:Here's my suggestion (Score:5, Informative)
I think that's simple and straight forward, but your government (and mine even more so) do not understand that because they think of games as being solely for children. Here in Australia we don't even have an 18+ rating for games. We also don't allow unrated games on the shelves. The result is that the vast majority of people who play games (which, as I said, is mostly over the age of 18) are saddled with kiddie junk. The few companies that actually try to make games for adults have their games effectively banned from my country (as they are refused a classification and unrated games are banned from the shelves). So think yourself lucky that you have any adult rated games there at all.
Re:Here's my suggestion (Score:5, Informative)
The parent also didn't say that games should be banned for people under 18. The idea is that if a company wants people under 18 to be able to play the game, they have to submit it for review.
Review boards wouldn't be necessary for most games, as they are obviously targetted to adults and could go straight to the stores with a rating of 18+. If a game is meant for a younger audience (or for all ages), it can be submitted and reviewed and then deemed appropriate. This also has the effet of stopping violent games from "slipping thru the cracks."
Seems pretty reasonable to me
-B
Re:Patheitc (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Parents can't distribute either? (Score:4, Informative)
Sec. 12A-20. Affirmative defenses. In any prosecution
21 arising under this Article, it is an affirmative defense:
22 (1) that the defendant was a family member of the minor for
23 whom the game was purchased. "Family member" for the purpose of
24 this Section, includes a parent, sibling, grandparent, aunt,
25 uncle, or first cousin;
Of course the definition of "Violence" is way too vague... I guess Madden or any boxing game is "Mature" game because it allows serious physical harm to another human being
30 (e) "Violent" video games include depictions of or
31 simulations of human-on-human violence in which the player
32 kills, seriously injures, or otherwise causes serious physical
33 harm to another human, including but not limited to depictions
1 of death, dismemberment, amputation, decapitation, maiming,
2 disfigurement, mutilation of body parts, or rape.
Re:Here's my suggestion (Score:5, Informative)
The problem is that in practice, any certification costs money. This means that any game developed by nonprofits in general will not be certified. It would be a lot of work, and quite likely costly, for a OSS developer to ensure that his game was certified according to each of dozens of different classification-boards.
And if you think large groups of countries will agree on one common standard, one common certification board, you're dreaming. That's not the case for movies and wouldn't be the case for games.
Practical upshot ? You can't legally sell a Linux-distro to a minor in Germany. In practice it's done all the time, because the law gets ignored for things which aren't mainly games, and which are obviously not very objectionable anyway.
But in principle, you'll have to strip ALL games (including solitaire, mahjong, minesweeper and tuxracer) from a Linux-distro, or jump trough expensive and time-consuming hoops if you want to legally sell your linux-distro to minors in Germany.
17 year-old linux-users aren't exactly *that* rare.
Re:No more than other media... (Score:3, Informative)
I used to not put a whole lot of weight into the rating of games. Until I got married last summer and was suddenly tasked with making parental judgements for 2 young stepsons, 8 and 10. We played mostly Gamecube games, but eventually my wife and I bought them a PS2 and started with Jak & Daxter, Sly Cooper, etc. Then it became Ratchet and Clank, Jak II (both rated 'T', both slightly violent). Then came the phone calls from the teachers. Both kids were talking back, pushing other kids, throwing things on the playground, etc. We took away all but Mario Party and saw results almost overnight. It was then that I became a believer that video games CAN change the way children behave. I can only imagine what changes take place when kids play 'M'-rated games from the time they are 13 and younger.
And before you respond to say, "It's just your kids that have a problem", we have talked with other parents at school and in the neighborhood and they all have seen the same thing. The more the kids play games with violence (even cartoon violence), the worse their behavior.
Note: I am COMPLETELY against censorship. If you want to shoot cops, rape prostitutes and mow down aliens with rocket launchers in a video game, be my guest. But any tools that the government can provide that help us raise respectable children are welcome by me, and I'm sure many, many other American parents.
Regulation (Score:1, Informative)
self-regulate get regulated.
Movies get rated/regulated and so should
video games. Parents can bypass the
regulation for their kids same as movies.
Free games you make yourself and give
to your friends will get the same
regulation that home movies get -- none.