Slashdot Mirror


AU Internet Censorship Spells Bad News For Gamers

eldavojohn writes "Kotaku is running an investigative piece examining what internet censorship means for games in Australia. Australia has some of the most draconian video game attitudes in the world, and the phrase 'refused classification' should strike fear in game developers and publishers looking to market games there. Internet censorship may expand this phrase to mean that anybody hosting anything about the game may suffer censorship in AU. Kotaku notes, 'This means that if a game is refused classification (RC) in Australia — like, say, NFL Blitz, or Getting Up — content related to these games would be added to the ISP filter. [This would bring up] a range of questions, foremost of those being: what happens when an otherwise harmless website ... hosts material from those games (screenshots, trailers, etc) that is totally fine in the US or Japan or Europe, but that has been refused classification in Australia?' Kotaku received a comment from the Australian Department of Broadband Communication promising that the whole website won't be blocked, just the material related to the game (videos, images, etc). Imagine maintaining that blacklist!"

30 of 152 comments (clear)

  1. Once te flood gates are pushed open... by Bananatree3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Once the flood gates of ISP level censorship are pushed open, it's simply going to keep cascading until our Mate's internet connection is "sanitized" to death, where sanitized is on a sliding scale depending on whoever is in power at the time.

  2. Expect no less by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Expect no less from the country that brought us the likes of the Fuhrer and the Governator

    1. Re:Expect no less by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Dude....AUSTRALIA...not Austria. *facepalm*

  3. The silver lining by Barny · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The upshot of this whole thing is of course that our jobless rate is going to evaporate as we are going to need that chunk of the the population to surf the net and flag possible bad content.

    --
    ...
    /me sighs
    1. Re:The silver lining by Barny · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hate replying to myself, particularly when I wanted to just make it funny, but FUCK this is going to be a growth industry in Australia.

      Lets just work on youtube, 20 hours of vid uploaded per min (quick google search gave me this number), thats 1200 people required to be constantly watching new youtube vids for potentially bad content.

      People can't work 24/7 :)

      So, in 8hr shifts, we have 3600 people... wait, holidays...

      Lets just make it a round 4000 people employed just for keeping up with the current youtube uploads.

      Now thats to keep up, how much to get ahead and start indexing all those vids already there?

      --
      ...
      /me sighs
    2. Re:The silver lining by Calinous · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There are 40 work hours a week (and a total of 168 hours), and the free time is about 3 weeks a year. Add one week for other issues (medical leave, ...) and you end up working about 48 weeks a year, or some 1920 hours a year.
        20 hours of content a minute, 525000 minutes a year makes 10 million hours of content a year, against 2000 hours work a year makes 5,000 employees.
        Now, what about all the pictures updated to all the picture sites?

    3. Re:The silver lining by Sabriel · · Score: 3, Funny

      As of June 2009, 1.67 billion people worldwide use the Internet. http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm

      Even just legitimate submitted complaints (assuming folks bothered) would bury the scheme. Now imagine a small shell script...

    4. Re:The silver lining by Xest · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Which would be quite amusing, because it'd basically mean you had half the population looking for content the government doesn't want them to see.

  4. Political action by H0D_G · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I encourage every member of Slashdot to donate to Gamers 4 Croydon. Gamers for Croydon is a political party running against atkinson in his home seat in an attempt to raise awareness about the R18+ restriction on games and to oppose mandatory internet filtering. Seriously, go donate and spread the word

    http://www.gamers4croydon.org/

    --
    Kids! Bringing about Armageddon can be dangerous. Do not attempt it in your home!
    1. Re:Political action by some_guy_88 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sounds like they have similar goals to the Australian Pirate Party. (also worth joining)

    2. Re:Political action by Joakal · · Score: 4, Informative

      There's a list of what parties support the Internet Filtering Scheme(s): http://shockseat.com/communications/internet-filtering-scheme

      /disclaimer, I maintain the website.

      I'm recently doing a survey which will include game classification, there's no R and X classification for games. And not just internet filtering, but copyright, patent, whether they support other means to restrict content ownership and more. You can view a sample of the survey that was sent to parties here: http://shockseat.com/survey Although it's pretty amaterurish, it's already making it much easier to add more issues to my website.

      Bonus: If my site takes off, I will get or at least present vague notions of what the parties plan to do so it would be up to the 'crowd' to demand clarity.

      Some more information about the website here: http://shockseat.com/about

    3. Re:Political action by Cinnaman · · Score: 2, Informative

      An interview with the president of the Pirate Party here http://www.truthnews.com.au/radio/wordpress/?p=868

    4. Re:Political action by deniable · · Score: 3, Funny

      You can hold the Liberty Advocates Party Dance as a fund-raiser. I know I'd pay for that.

  5. wow. by Joelfabulous · · Score: 2, Insightful

    death by bureaucracy... department of broadband communication. are you fucking kidding me?

    this is the kind of idiocy that was generally historically corrected by violent revolution... sigh.

    gg Australia, way to self-immolate in the present tense. it was nice knowing you, I guess. thanks for all the fish, or whatever condolences I'm supposed to offer.

    --
    Sometimes I wonder if I think too much.
    1. Re:wow. by mjwx · · Score: 2, Insightful

      way to self-immolate in the present tense.

      You do know that self-immolation refers to suicide by fire, more specifically to a form of extreme protest by Buddhist monks. Monks who have taken vows not to harm other creatures set themselves on fire, it was commonplace in south Vietnam as protest against the war and corrupt South Vietnamese government and is occasionally done in China in protest over China's occupation of Tibet.

      Deffo used the wrong word there mate.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  6. Welcome to the future! by precariousgray · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why can't we simply accept that this is the 21st century, and nothing should be censored? Ever. Don't want to see the content within a particular video game? Great, don't look at it. That's your right. It is also mine to masturbate to bloody, mutilated appendages if I so choose. Please replace "video game" above with any applicable form of media.

    --
    not much, just being forced to manually insert line breaks into my comment
    1. Re:Welcome to the future! by wizardforce · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why can't we simply accept that this is the 21st century, and nothing should be censored? Ever.

      Politicians never got that upgrade. The bug in their code that compels them to control various aspects of peoples' lives for whatever reason has not been patched nor is there any real sign that it ever will be.

      --
      Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
  7. NAZI ZOMBIE BRAINS CHILDREN ON FIRE CARTOON PORN by assemblerex · · Score: 5, Funny

    And now...Slashdot is no longer viewable to Australians.

  8. Fifty bucks says this doesnt pass parliment by mjwx · · Score: 4, Informative

    again.

    Australia's parliament voted against internet censorship in 2008 and there was a lot less organisation against it then. This close to an election many pollies are thinking of their chances of being re-elected. The Greens still hold the balance of power in parliament and they are dead against the censorship scheme, most of the independents are offside now as well, the Opposition will vote no simply because Labor is voting yes.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  9. Join the pirates. by hool5400 · · Score: 4, Informative
    --

    Remember, it takes 42 muscles to frown and only 4 to pull the trigger of a sniper rifle.
  10. Seeing what over Au goverment departments have... by HJED · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is especially worrying when you realise how corrupt the government in Australia is, I recently came to realised this when I found out that the Department of Education in NSW block access to ALL search engines accept google for students at public primary and high schools. (apart from yahoo which you can get one page of results from if you go to search.yahoo.com)

    --
    null
  11. Imagine the blacklist is right by Wizarth · · Score: 4, Informative

    Imagine maintaining that blacklist!

    Imagine is exactly right, because the blacklist will be secret. The explanation being that having a list of RC material available will encourage people to view it... except they won't be able to...

    Incidentally, for the people who think this filter is about blocking child porn, consider this: Child porn is illegal, and is the jurisdiction of the federal police. The blacklist will not be maintained by the police, and any ILLEGAL content is to be submitted to the police. The RC filter list is only for UNDESIRABLE content, content that is NOT illegal.

  12. Subject by Ihmhi · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So first Britain treats 1984 like an instruction manual, and now Australia is treating Equilibrium like a How-To film?

    This game has been rated EC-10.

  13. Re:democracy in action by wizardforce · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why care if that country wants to hide behind a second great internet wall?

    Even if that were true (which is debatable) There is the minority to consider. Just because a majority decides to throw their rights away does not make it ok to force that decision on to those who aren't ok with giving up their rights to free speech.

    --
    Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
  14. Re:NAZI ZOMBIE BRAINS CHILDREN ON FIRE CARTOON POR by El_Muerte_TDS · · Score: 3, Funny

    Brains? Really?

    I guess when you outlaw brains, only outlaws will have brains.

  15. Re:Aussie politicians just don't get it by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The great firewall of China is the nearest anyone has got to censoring the internet, and they only just manage it by controlling all access to the internet, running everything through their filters, and having draconian penalties for trying to bypass it.... and it still does not work ....

    --
    Puteulanus fenestra mortis
  16. Third World solution: disobey the law by mangu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Once the ISPs are having trouble maintaining their REAL services for their users just because some non-sense law bullies them into this filtering, they will take action to change the law.

    One of the main differences between rich countries and poor countries is how the law is regarded by the population.

    In developed countries there is a general sentiment among the people that obeying the law is something that benefits everybody. In the Third World the general sentiment is that the law is something created by those in power for their own benefit.

    The way things are going, expect a major increase in corruption and violence in the currently rich contries in the next decades. You cannot keep creating law after law that go against the wishes of the majority of the people without unwanted consequences.

    1. Re:Third World solution: disobey the law by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Interesting

      OMG! They want to make the internet like TV. TV is 100 channels and nothing on, internet will be a billion webpages and nothing on (at least nothing you could see anymore).

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  17. Censorship has multiple uses by thasmudyan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Of course, ideologues like the limitless possibilities censorship offers when it comes to shaping the thoughts of the population by making inconvenient material unavailable. It also helps them get re-elected. But in this case, censorship has a very clear business aspect: it means that if you as a publisher don't pay up, they have the power to make your product disappear. Not only will your website disappear from view, the censorship filter makes it impossible for people to even talk about your product. So this is about corruption, clear and simple.

  18. Re:NAZI ZOMBIE BRAINS CHILDREN ON FIRE CARTOON POR by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You say i in jest, but this report alone might be already enough. We're talking about RC games here. Is mentioning a "banned" game enough to get hit by the censor bat? Is reporting about a "censored" event, practice or even fad enough to be censored?

    If so, it basically means that censoring ANY medium is perfectly possible in Australia now. Fox reported badly about the Aussie Prez? Let's see, did they have something about happy slapping lately? Yes? Great, *POOF*. BBC disagreeing with Australian foreign policy? Hmm... browse their documentaries, I'm sure we find something that matches our filter criteria. /. repeatedly slapping our censoring policy? Now, that should be easy, I'm sure they have something about copyright in one of their stories that make them censor worthy.

    The threat isn't so much that we might not get to play some computer game. The threat is that it becomes easily possible to silence media outlets that are deemed "unwanted". Oh, you cannot block them for their anti-Aussie-Government stories, but they will for sure carry something that makes them blockworthy.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.