Legal Trouble For MMOs In Australia 207
Zonk tips a story at Massively that has uncovered a potential legal controversy in Australia where some MMOs are concerned. Under Australian law, all games require a formal rating to be sold. Due to an oversight, many MMOs do not carry such a rating, yet they have been sold since release without anyone realizing the problem. "According to the Act, selling a single copy of an unclassified game attracts a penalty of AU$27,220.80 or two years. Selling unclassified games in commercial quantities (50 or more) can have a much steeper schedule of penalties, and additional penalties apply to advertising unclassified material, or simply omitting the correct ratings labels on the merchandise. ... publishers and distributors at some point misunderstood their obligations with respect to MMOG classifications in Australia, and operated under the belief that no such rating was required here." Reader Clomer points out that this has been brought to the attention of the Australian media, so hopefully the issue will be resolved soon.
Pisses me (Score:4, Insightful)
Adults should be free to buy whatever the hell games they want. Requiring a rating on games, movies, music, etc, is just censorship by another name.
Re:Pisses me (Score:5, Insightful)
Would those adults that should be free to buy whatever they want be the ones who are over 18 and hence generally (unless some countries have odd certificates/classifications) both old enough to be considered adults and old enough to buy any game because the classifications stop at 18?
"It's terrible censorship that games and movies have ratings that stop at 18, thereby not stopping anyone 18 years old or older (who at that age is considered to be an adult) from watching or buying them"!
Re:Pisses me (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Pisses me (Score:5, Informative)
And in the case of games, anything deemed not suitable for a 15 year old is banned.
There is no R18+ rating for games.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Pisses me (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I guess that your "liberty" doesn't include buying Fallout 3, F.E.A.R. 2, or Dead Space.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll answer that for you. No, your government doesn't let you.
Re:Pisses me (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yep, Australia is turning into a nanny state. I wonder how they will deal with MMORPGs though? Can't the publishers dynamically update quests and monsters? I can think of all sorts of ways this could be used to work around the ratings systems.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You don't understand. Somebody somewhere may be playing games that *they haven't approved of.* This is obviously unacceptable.
Re:Pisses me (Score:5, Insightful)
Adults should be free to buy whatever the hell games they want. Requiring a rating on games, movies, music, etc, is just censorship by another name.
No, it's not, and conflating the two is extremely counter-productive.
Not all media purchasers are adults. Not all adult media purchasers are purchasing the media for their own use. A ratings system is they so they are able to make *educated decisions* about what it is they are purchasing. A ratings systems - in and of itself - does not prevent an adult from buying anything they want.
Now, a ratings system might have a "Not Rated" or "Illegal" rating that means no-one is allowed to sell anything that is rated as such, however, that is simply a problem with the individual ratings system, not with the entire concept. Australia has such a problem, in that there is no "R" equivalent for games. This doesn't mean all the other ratings given out to games are meaningless or pointless.
Ratings systems are _good_ and should be encouraged. They allow consumers to make educated decisions about their purchases and substantially deflate genuine pro-censorship arguments.
Re:Pisses me (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, a ratings system might have a "Not Rated" or "Illegal" rating that means no-one is allowed to sell anything that is rated as such, however, that is simply a problem with the individual ratings system, not with the entire concept.
The distinction between something being at the highest or "worst" rating and being unclassified is akin to censorship. Watch the movie "This film is not yet rated." It shows how the MPAA is censoring films that it doesn't agree with, and that's in the United States with a non-public controlled rating system. At least when a film gets hit with NC-17 here, they can sell the film on the internet, or change it a little bit, call it unrated, and have no problems getting it to be sold at a store.
Stores are afraid to stock NC-17 titles, because they're usually associated with porn. The problem with Australia's method is that the board that makes the rating decision could, someday soon, decide that a game is sending the message that the Aussie government is evil, and refuse it classification.
Now, you won't get arrested for having the game yet, but you can't even buy the unrated version like you can here in the US. It IS censorship by another name, and if you believe otherwise, the spin doctoring that the Australian government is doing seems to be working its magic.
Re:Pisses me (Score:5, Insightful)
The distinction between something being at the highest or "worst" rating and being unclassified is akin to censorship. Watch the movie "This film is not yet rated." It shows how the MPAA is censoring films that it doesn't agree with, and that's in the United States with a non-public controlled rating system.
Er, you sound surprised, but this is exactly the kind of result that would be expected from a privately (or "industry") -run ratings system. They have movies to sell, after all, so it pays well to come up with ways of excluding movies that they don't derive an income from.
Stores are afraid to stock NC-17 titles, because they're usually associated with porn. The problem with Australia's method is that the board that makes the rating decision could, someday soon, decide that a game is sending the message that the Aussie government is evil, and refuse it classification.
Which will be very quickly reported on and general public outrage will fix the problem.
I would trust our Government-funded, but independent, ratings board (and its publicly disclosed membership and standards) for objective and reasonable ratings long, long, long before I would trust any group of media companies attempting to do the same.
Now, you won't get arrested for having the game yet, but you can't even buy the unrated version like you can here in the US. It IS censorship by another name, and if you believe otherwise, the spin doctoring that the Australian government is doing seems to be working its magic.
Censorship is the active banning of material, it also means it is illegal to own the material.
Refusing classification because the rating system lacks a suitable rating even though one exists for identical content in other media is a minor lacking in the ratings system.
If you think the two are identical then you're just trying to use paranoia to sensationalise the real problem which, as I said previously, is extremely counter-productive.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Censorship is the active banning of material, it also means it is illegal to own the material.
Refusing classification because the rating system lacks a suitable rating even though one exists for identical content in other media is a minor lacking in the ratings system.
If you think the two are identical then you're just trying to use paranoia to sensationalise the real problem which, as I said previously, is extremely counter-productive.
But by your own account, it is illegal to own unrated games, so that is state-sponsored censorship.
I'm just finishing work on a mod for an RPG. The publishers of the RPG want to publish the mod, but want us to tone down some of the content in order to do so. This is because if they publish it it would push the classification of their game into 'Adults Only', which for commercial reasons they don't want. We probably aren't going to agree...
I don't have any problem with our work being rated 'Adults only'. It
Re: (Score:2)
But by your own account, it is illegal to own unrated games, so that is state-sponsored censorship.
It's not illegal to own unrated media.
And, again, "not rated" and "banned" are different in both execution and intent. One is a passive action, the other is an active one. It's like the difference between manslaughter and premeditated murder.
Re:Pisses me (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
How will people know about it if it can't be released?
And assuming they're anything like people in the US and UK, they wouldn't care anyway. I would say sheeple, but some might take offence.
If it's really minor it'd be trivial to fix. Seems to me
Re: (Score:2)
How will people know about it if it can't be released?
Possibly because various news rags would be all over it like a bad smell ?
If it's really minor it'd be trivial to fix. Seems to me like there's deliberate intent to keep that bug (or is it a feature) in place. That would indeed be censorship.
From a procedural perspective, it is trivial to fix. All they need to do is expand the current R and X ratings to encompass computer games as well as other media. There are lots of minor problems in the world
Re:Pisses me (Score:4, Insightful)
If history shows us anything, it's that once something is made illegal to sell, it doesn't take much effort to make it illegal to own.
I'm sensationalizing it for a reason, and that reason is simply because censorship in ANY form is fucking wrong. And it's VERY wrong when it's being done by the government. This is censorship, plain and simple. The government is saying "no, the citizens aren't adult enough to make the decision to watch that, we're going to make the decision for them."
Re: (Score:2)
Refusing classification because the rating system lacks a suitable rating even though one exists for identical content in other media is a minor lacking in the ratings system.
If you think the two are identical then you're just trying to use paranoia to sensationalise the real problem which, as I said previously, is extremely counter-productive.
If you think that censorship can't happen simply by refusing to rate something you live if your own special world. How do you think drugs became illegal in the U.S. it all started with stamps [wikipedia.org] and while we're on the subject lets go back a bit further we can see how require a special stamp [wikipedia.org] aka a rating sticker can have damaging effects on all kinds of things.
Re: (Score:2)
But the beauty of a media company group's ratings, is that you don't have to trust them. You can use anyone's ratings to select your movies. You would have to hate the whole human race to say there's no one out there you can trust. It's pretty damn easy t
Re: (Score:2)
My naivety meter just went through the roof. The past decade should be proof to anyone living in America that it's very eas
Re: (Score:2)
> "Watch the movie "This film is not yet rated." It shows how the MPAA is censoring films that it doesn't agree with"
I watched that documentary, and the entire time I kept thinking, the problem isn't that there's a rating system, it's that there's only one rating system. There's nothing wrong with having someone warn southern Christian parents that they might not find a movie appropriate for their kids because it contains content they'd object to, such as homosexuality. The problem is the stranglehold th
Re: (Score:2)
Besides, some adults
do not want to watch/play with some material.
For instance
I am not interested in horror films or games.
To take original post words
I would be "pissed of"
if a game ellusively introduced such material.
Some would argue
I have to read games reviews before I buy,
why should I do that ?
Instead of simply pick up a game
and being confident
the game won't bring subjec
Re: (Score:2)
First off... that's your problem. Just because YOU might not want to play it doesn't mean it needs to be banned so that others who do cannot. If you are, ostensibly, an adult, then cope.
Secondly, the enter key is not punctuation.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Ratings systems are _good_ and should be encouraged. They allow consumers to make educated decisions about their purchases and substantially deflate genuine pro-censorship arguments.
When they are used only informatively, this is correct.
When there are laws connected to the ratings, preventing unrated games from being sold, and the same group can refuse to rate, it is censorship. The government is deciding what can and cannot be expressed. There's no other word for it, and no equivocation is going to make it not the case.
Re: (Score:2)
When there are laws connected to the ratings, preventing unrated games from being sold, and the same group can refuse to rate, it is censorship. The government is deciding what can and cannot be expressed. There's no other word for it, and no equivocation is going to make it not the case.
There is a difference between not rating because no suitable rating exists, and not rating because the objective is to ban it.
Conflating the two is neither valid, nor productive.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
There is a difference between not rating because no suitable rating exists, and not rating because the objective is to ban it.
Conflating the two is neither valid, nor productive.
When the same group (government in this case) gets to create the ratings AND rate the games AND make the laws, that's clearly false. If no suitable rating exists, it is entirely in their power to create one. If they do not do not create a rating appropriate for "games where you impale babies on spikes," Occam's Razor says it's because they don't want to rate it == they want it illegal.
I'm hoping they do create a rating for MMOs though... the Aussie guild in my alliance is a good bunch of guys.
Re: (Score:2)
If they do not do not create a rating appropriate for "games where you impale babies on spikes," Occam's Razor says it's because they don't want to rate it == they want it illegal.
You have choices like apathy, incompetence and pandering to special interests, but the simplest explanation you can come up with for boobies and gore in computer games (when the same thing shown on IMAX screens is fine) not getting a rating is because the government is trying to ban them ?
Clearly Occam's Razor needs some sharpe
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Can't be apathy. If that were the case, unrated games wouldn't be illegal for sale because they wouldn't care.
Incompetence I'll grant as a possibility, but, George W Bush notwithstanding, mouth-breathers with room-temperature IQs tend to have trouble getting into high office. The level of incompetence would have to be staggering even by US Government standards[0], so that's not a particularly simple explanation.
Pandering to special interests == they want it banned because they were bribed by those who want
Re: (Score:2)
Can't be apathy. If that were the case, unrated games wouldn't be illegal for sale because they wouldn't care.
Er, no. Any unrated media (eg: films as well) is illegal to sell. Ergo, apathy applies quite well (they can't be bothered extending the R and X categories to cover games).
Incompetence I'll grant as a possibility, but, George W Bush notwithstanding, mouth-breathers with room-temperature IQs tend to have trouble getting into high office. The level of incompetence would have to be staggering even
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And if the British government requires a rating system for pamphlets like "Common Sense," that doesn't prevent any colonists from getting the pamphlet. Just require labeling of subversion, so t
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
condense a complex game / movie / whatever into a single number
Yes you can. [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I like the idea of rating various elements tha
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Correct.
Any parent using a rating system is a fool. It's a useful tool to let parents start with knowledge of a game, and in some cases that's enough...if your 14 year old wants to buy a G-rated (Or whatever the equiv is.) game, you can just let them. But you might want to check on the next level up. And if they show up with an 'R' game you'll need to go specifically go and find out why it got that rating and if you're okay with it.
No, the point of the rating systems, the only reason they shouldn't be scr
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah! Bring back Lawn Darts [cpsc.gov]!
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah! Bring back Lawn Darts [cpsc.gov]!
god forbid kids toys reflect real-world dangers.
If your kid is incapable of hurting himself with the toys he owns, he will not learn proper self-restraint.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but if he is capable of hurting himself with the toys he owns, he may not make it to adulthood. OK, my original post wasn't a fair comparison, but I just wanted to point out that usually laws exist for good reasons.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but if he is capable of hurting himself with the toys he owns, he may not make it to adulthood.
there's always that risk. parents need to learn to live with it or never eat steak in their homes again, or else they're hypocrites.
Re: (Score:2)
So, net win for the rest of us either way.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The lawn darts were a bit extreme but I have to agree.
There seems to be more and more of an obsession with stopping kids from hurting themselves in any way at all.
I hate to imagine how dull my childhood would be if I had it over now, when did letting kids climb trees go out of fashion?
When did playing with candels and matches(where it wouldn't burn down the house) become a sin?
I went through scouts and now help out the local group occasionally and it's as if most of the kids these days reach the age of 12 w
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The lawn darts were a bit extreme but I have to agree.
what was extreme about them?
Read the notice.
How many kids have been killed by being struck with baseballs before or since? Baseball bats? Surely more than 3.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Not in Australia. Gov's refusal to rate == ban, from adults and non-adults alike.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
For sale. Reasonable rates.
Banned in Australia?
Chess
Go.
Tag.
Red light green light.
Mother May I
Simon Says
Old Maid
Truth or dare
Cops n Robbers
Smear the.. I mean, Chase the Ball Around
Cowboys and Aborigines
Duck Duck Wallaby
Go Fish
Are each of these rated?
Re: (Score:2)
Adults should be free to buy whatever the hell games they want. Requiring a rating on games, movies, music, etc, is just censorship by another name.
What other name is that? Seems to me like it's just "censorship." Period.
Re: (Score:2)
My point exactly (I made the same one below).
Re: (Score:2)
Requiring a rating on games, movies, music, etc, is just censorship by another name.
No, it's really not. Not even close.
Adults should be free to buy whatever the hell games they want.
They are.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
When cases like this come up, I like to do this:
Replace the word Games with the word Books. Games are an interactive story, so calling them books isn't a huge stretch.
Now, re-read the story with the new words. Worried yet?
Re:Pisses me (Score:4, Insightful)
Adults should be free to buy whatever weapons they want. Requiring licenses and waiting periods is just tyranny by another name.
Adults should be free to buy whatever drugs they want. Banishing marijuana and LSD is just oppression by another name.
Wow, this is a ridiculous comparison. Maybe they should outlaw cars too? They kill and hurt a lot more people than games do.
How about we outlaw stairs? Single story buildings ONLY. Stairways kill and hurt more people than games do!
While we're at it, let's outlaw solid food. People choking on solid foods have a higher mortality rate than people playing a video game.
Re:Pisses me (Score:5, Insightful)
`Wow, this is a ridiculous comparison. Maybe they should outlaw cars too? They kill and hurt a lot more people than games do.`
I mean, its not as if you need to have a license to drive or anything like that.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
So the suggestion is that there should be a licence to play games? What exactly would they test? Shows no increased sign of wanting to kill people after playing Doom for an hour? Unless that's your proposal then your counter to the OP makes no sense at all.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Shouldn't being an adult be enough "license" to play or watch whatever you want?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Video games, generally being an arbitrary collection of binary information (typically expressed by electron progression through [semi]conductive materials), have effectively zero mass and since the amount of kinetic energy inherent in any body is proportional to the square of the mass, you can only literally kill someone with a video game by using a localised black hole and/or particle accelerator to get the data to near the speed of light.
Secondary effects, such as that of the media carrying the "static" c
Re:Pisses me (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"Wow, this is a ridiculous comparison. Maybe they should outlaw cars too? They kill and hurt a lot more people than games do."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_inspection [wikipedia.org]
"How about we outlaw stairs? Single story buildings ONLY. Stairways kill and hurt more people than games do!"
http://www.communities.gov.uk/planningandbuilding/buildingregulations/ [communities.gov.uk]
"While we're at it, let's outlaw solid food. People choking on solid foods have a higher mortality rate than people playing a video game."
http://www.fda.gov/ [fda.gov]
You
Re: (Score:2)
Hello troll, you got me to respond. Do you feel good about yourself. Feel free to masturbate now. So you are implying that posting links to three sites that concerns regulation in the three areas that the grand grand parent implied as not being regulated is a bad argument.
about emissions testing
Which if you don't pass gets your car banned. Sounds like on topic and correct to me
a british site about building code (that doesnt mention stairs in the 3 minutes I looked)
Good damn, you want a site about stair regulations specifically. Just how annoying can you get. Here you go, this time searching on stair regulations speci
Re: (Score:2)
Shhhh!! Do not give them any ideas!
Re: (Score:2)
Adults should be free to buy whatever weapons they want. Requiring licenses and waiting periods is just tyranny by another name.
Adults should be free to buy whatever drugs they want. Banishing marijuana and LSD is just oppression by another name.
Yup, people as high as a kite, or drunk as a skunk, should be able to buy firearms - preferably automatic weapons - at any time of the day or night. In fact, we should create a place for all these 'freedom-loving' people, oh wait, it already exists!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/5066860.stm [bbc.co.uk]
Re: (Score:2)
Adults should be free to buy whatever drugs they want. Banishing marijuana and LSD is just oppression by another name.
I know you're trolling, but... Exactly.
I, as an adult, should have the right to do whatever I want to my body chemistry. Besides, cigarettes and alcohol are legal too.
Re: (Score:2)
Finally, somebody talking sense!
Re: (Score:2)
it's the "it's for your own good" mentality.
You see what happens is that your mother(well someones mother) votes for someone who promises to force you to stay on the straight and narrow and make sure you eat your broccoli.
Re:Pisses me (Score:5, Funny)
They're also quite dangerous if they are handled properly. That's the point of them, isn't it?
Re: (Score:2)
If handled properly, they are pointed at pieces of paper or deer to be hunted whenever they are fired.
What this really depends on is your definition of 'dangerous'.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Could say the same thing about books.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, counterpoint:
In these examples, explain how a 3rd party is affected:
Tobacco: Smoked at home, or outdoors away from crowds (regular air pollution is far worse)
Cannabis: When vaporized or eaten
Alcohol: Drank at home, and didn't go out to drive
The long and short of it is that almost anything we do can have an affect on 3rd parties. But this stems from irresponsible usage of anything: drugs, video games, food, automobiles.
The root cause is responsibility, not the substance. That's why we punish drunk driv
Re: (Score:2)
Tobacco: Smoked at home, or outdoors away from crowds (regular air pollution is far worse)
Eventually, that person's health will deteriorate, and my taxes will have to pay for the additional care required.
Cannabis: When vaporized or eaten
See above.
Alcohol: Drank at home, and didn't go out to drive
See above.
Not saying that should be an argument against it, as lots of people do lots of things that cause their health to deteriorate,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Yes. You cannot sell unrated items in Austrailia, or you could be fined for doing so.
How existential of you, but I don't get what this has to do with the story.
Re: (Score:2)
Very good. However, you have the option of, like in the USA. G - pretty much unoffensive to everybody. Ted Nugent might take offense at the potrayal of tasty Bambi, but everybody else is fine with it. R - We really recommend you think twice, maybe watch it by yourself before you expose your kids to it. X/NC17 - why are you even thinking about showing this to kids? Unrated - you take your own shot.
However, the situation in Canada has no 'R' or 'X' rating equivalent for games, and games are not allowed t
no surprise (Score:5, Insightful)
As long as there are politicians in need of a platform to rant on in order to get elected, nonsense like this will happen.
Since the overwhelming majority of people neither play, or possibly even understand, computer games, its a soft touch for some 'fear inducement' followed by 'and I can save the children from it'.
Thus far it hasn't stopped the games industry raking in billions over the years, nor will it in the future.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Since the overwhelming majority of people neither play, or possibly even understand, computer games, its a soft touch for some 'fear inducement' followed by 'and I can save the children from it'.
Yes, it's not like 97% of American teens play computer games [foxnews.com] or over 50% of American adults [foxnews.com]
Re:no surprise (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, it's not like 97% of American teens play computer games [foxnews.com] or over 50% of American adults [foxnews.com]
Strangely enough, most of the world aren't Americans, and this story isn't about America either.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Since the overwhelming majority of politicians neither play, or possibly even understand, computer games*, they'll agree to whatever the minority holders of the balance of power in parliament ask for in exchange for support for other policies they're pushing.
* Insert any minority concern here
There, fixed that for you.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
At some point real soon, there is going to be a backlash against the 'protect the children from video games' crap.
We're hitting the ~25 year mark for video games in people's houses, both in computers and consoles like the Atari and NES, which means that almost everyone under 35 grew up with them to some extent. Even if they didn't have any, they knew people who did, and played them.
If we assume that 'children who need protecting' are children 10-18, and that people have kids when they're 20-30, the young
Confusing Developments (Score:2, Funny)
So why then do we have the Aussies being uptight about foolish things and the Americans being pretty chilled out about most things?
My belief in stereotypes has been shattered!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Confusing Developments (Score:4, Interesting)
This is America. Kids can't look at boobs, but you can legally own and operate [cracked.com] flamethrowers, build and use garage guns, and fire an M134 minigun.
We make a lot of sense here, don't we?
Penalty - Send all the convicts to Australia (Score:5, Funny)
AU$27,220.80 or two years? I for one vote for doing things like in the old days: Just send all the convicts to Australia...
Re: (Score:2)
If they outlaw sending convicts to Australia, only convicts will live in Australia.
hard to believe (Score:2)
publishers and distributors at some point misunderstood their obligations ... or did their lawyers simply say "hey I think we can get away with this, some others already in this arena are doing it!" I find it hard to believe a whole squadron of expensive suits "overlooked" this.
Start selling "games" (Score:2)
Start selling games as academic, sociological research tools. I don't think you need a rating on those.
Sold or rented? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Games sold via iTunes? (Score:2)
Is there even a rating system available when someone sells a game via the iTunes Store? Are all iPhone/iPod touch game developpers world-wide targeted for lawsuits from the Australian government?!
Hmm.. (Score:2)
I think that Australia should just fine each involved company to the max. They shouldn't give any of them a "free pass." As long as they make the entire industry that tired to dance around the law by ignoring it the same or similar punishment, then it'd be mostly favor.
If the Australian government wants to make video games unprofitable for them, then more power to them. The effect could be an entire industry boycotting a country though. Or worse, use Australia as the "bad guys" in the next series of games i
In Soviet Australia... (Score:3, Funny)
... the MMO's penalize YOU!
That's not how it works (Score:2)
You are obviously not very familiar with the Australian Media.
"This game is ILLEGAL in Australia. Is YOUR child playing it? Details at 6"
"Police aware of rampant smuggling operation, do nothing"
"Software smugglers face decades in prison if caught"
"Prime Minister announces new anti-terrorism/unclassified games task force"
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
it was a joke.. /whoosh!