Slashdot Mirror
ESRB Exposes Emails of Gamers Who Filed Privacy Complaints
simrook writes, "Many people filed privacy complaints with the ESRB over Blizzard's recent (and afterward recanted) move to require the display of users' real life names on Blizzard's official forums. 961 of those complainants had their email addresses exposed in the ESRB's response." The response itself didn't go into the organization's thoughts on Blizzard's plan, but they explained to the Opposable Thumbs blog that anonymity isn't a huge concern to them, as long as users are given the opportunity to opt out.
"The role of the ESRB Privacy Online program is to make sure that member websites—those that display our seal on their pages — are compliant with an increasingly complex series of privacy protection laws and are offering a secure space for users to interact and do business online. ... But online privacy protection doesn't necessarily mean the same thing as anonymity. It's about making sure that websites collecting personal information from users are doing so not only in accordance with federal regulations but also with best practices for protecting individuals' personal information online."
Yo dawg, I heard you like exposing your personal data
Like, "What is good for the rooster is good for the hen." doesn't translate into "What is good for the corporation is good for the consumer." worth a damn.
Apparently.
Orwell: "In a Time of Universal Deceit, telling the Truth is a Revolutionary Act"
What a tech blunder by a group that's suppose to deal with rating video game content. Email fail.
Looks like they forgot about bcc. Whoops.
This game will waste your life. Don't clicky!
Industry: I want regulatory capture, but I'm too cheap to even pay off politicians on a regular basis... I know, how about I tell the politicians and public that we can "police ourselves" and create a (not really) autonomous, "self regulatory" board where only the meaningless crap can be discussed and Industry gets to do what they want on substantive measures.
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
If you don't like Blizzards privacy policy, don't complain, cancel your account. That is the only language that big companies understand. If all you spineless idiots do is whine, then all Blizzard is going to do is continue taking your money.
They'll be alright if they've got nothing to hide! Think of the children!
In a not-so-surprising move the ESRB affirmed it's position on not giving a damn about the people or companies involved. The ESRB went onto say that we really don't care what you do as long you don't bother us and continue to fund our worthless existence.
The ESRB representative declined to provide his identity on the grounds that he really didn't want to be bothered with wasting his breathe. He went on to further shout obscenities and shake his bum at those attempting to pose questions regarding the recent actions by the ESRB.
In a follow-up interview they clarified their position and noted that the ESRB had never been in a position in which it listened to consumers. A representative apologized for the confusion and stated the company had never actually done anything to warrant such a view. In a prepared statement release early today, "The ESRB does not believe it has created any such illusions by statement, action or even accidental means whereby the consumer would would be in a position to believe we operate in ANY of their interests."
"You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
The value of being "Privacy Certified" by the ESRB just went to zero.
We are all God's parents.
best practices for protecting individuals' personal information online.
In other words, anonymity.
Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
We have built things like governs, agencies, corporations, religions... that are more powerfull than a single human. A corporation has the rights of a person, but if a corporation kills 1 persona, or 1000, something bad will happend, but the corporation will continue. Is like a lord in the medieval ages, is beyond any accountability.
Is just fair that we protect the innocent here, the single human that has something ugly to say about these powerfull entities. And something must be said, because these org's serve on nefarious purposes. Corporations has been described as squizoid for a reason.
So we have all-powerfull entities like Corporations, with tremendous powers, that act like jerks, and nothing really bad can happend to then. And we have the individual.
I am on a point, that I think we need privacy, not for itself, but because what we really want is anonymous, and we can't be anonymous withouth privacy.
What the FTC can crack on xanga and other small fish, but they don't have the balls to do anything over Blizzard's decision.....
If there are no 'faxed' or 'snail mailed' consent forms Blizzard has much underage banning to do, stealing mommies credit card is not consent as the law is written.
Hold their feet to the fire and let them cook
Removing the cloak of anonymity from users, (no gaming pun intended) opens up a can of worms like S. Korea has with violence spilling over from inside the games to the streets. Posting people's information only sets up circumstances for some very bad scenarios to play out. The PvP server forums are often full of haters hating full tilt on each other. When is someone unstable going to get pushed too far and end up on someone's doorstep? When some horrible situation plays out on the evening news, BlizTard will end up sued down to foodstamps in a trailer park for liabilities. Not to mention once a politician with an ax to grind will take a look at the clime of these kinds of game and start preaching on a tall soap box how they are so very evil for our kids and basically anyone to be wasting their lives in. About the time someone in the media checks out any trade channel in the game on a Saturday night, they will flip out, and so will their religious buddies. Stuff like this sells.
This is a formula for some crazy people to do something crazy, then the government to step in and take a big bite out of the game industry cash.
Take the Red Pill.
Seems reasonable to me. These people complained about privacy, so the ESRB removed their privacy. Isn't that what they wanted? Wait, you want me to do what, now? RTF...huh? :)
Actually, it strikes me more like some hens going to the foxes' own self-regulating organization to complain that a fox is harassing them. And being told basically that none of the foxes on the commission sees a problem with what that, and furthermore oops, here's where one can find the hens that complained.
The ESRB isn't some government agency, nor even some really independent group, but the game industry's own attempt at saying, "wait, we don't need no stinking government giving ratings for our games, we can do it ourselves." It's main reason to exist is as some organization who won't give an AO rating when the publisher doesn't want one, because WalMart doesn't carry AO games. Whereas a government agency might actually do such nasty things as actually slap an AO rating on a couple of games.
And even if you want to think they're still somehow independent, the fact still remains that they have no legal power or anything. Getting an ESRB rating is entirely voluntary. They rely on the major publishers actually being arsed to submit their games to them instead of getting together to make another rating agency. Or just deciding that a government agency wouldn't be that much worse after all. (The promise of a well paid honorary advisory job after a few years of bending over for the right folks, has worked wonders to buy government bureaucrats in other domains, after all.) Or they might just use the PEGI ratings they get in Europe in the USA too, since they have to go through with those anyway. It might even help their cause if they can pull that stunt off, since seeing tits is ok here at earlier ages.
And doubly so since we're not talking an indie market with lots of small publishers, where one breaking front would just hurt itself. We're talking a market dominated by a few big names who are so important not to lose, that even console manufacturers or major reviews sites bend over backwards to accomodate them. Ask for example Sega how well getting into a pissing contest with EA and giving "we don't need no stinking EA games" speeches worked for them back in the Dreamcast days. You don't even need to lose more than 1 or 2 of the biggest ones for the ESRB to become basically irrelevant.
At any rate, the ESRB has nothing to gain by helping _you_ against Vivendi, and everything to lose if it makes itself hated by the likes of Vivendi.
And these people went complaining to the ESRB about privacy? This strikes me as... well, not _exactly_ like going to the RIAA to complain about Sony's lawsuits, but not very far off that mark anyway.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
to play too, you know.
Used a standard, fake email address when I submitted my complaint. Though I just as easily could have used one of my inactive accounts.
Maybe that makes my complaint less valid in their eyes, but it helps avoid situations like this for me whilst still allowing me to at least (have the illusion of?) have my voice heard.
Sue their fucking ass for damages
They should have used Blind carbon copy instead of regular carbon copy. ;)
After years of not using a signature, I am going to make one to say the following: Fuck Beta
I used to think they were a good measure to allow for a reasonable compromise between game companies and retailers without getting stringent political involvement. Now I say just let the government tear them a new one.
By "exposing the address" they mean "reply-to-all-without-bcc" and not "posted to a public Internet location". In other words, it's the same mistake that office workers around the world make every day.
thanks information