Slashdot Mirror
Nintendo Pulls Dead Or Alive Over Porn Fears In EU
cpu6502 writes "The new Nintendo 3DS game Dead or Alive: Dimensions is being pulled from EU member states Sweden, Denmark, and Norway. The distributor said an in-game photography mode allows players to look-up the dresses of 17-year-old Ayane, Koroke, and Kasumi — which could be considered 'child porn' by local police."
Norway isn't a member of the EU.
More like Dead on Arrival then?
There's a spot in User Info for World of Warcraft account names? Really?
How can us Scandinavians be smug about American prudishness now?!
Don't bother clicking the link. There aren't any pictures.
So, how old is this beauty?
o|--
Child? You call those virtual plastic-y goddesses of bounce physics CHILDREN?
What is becoming of this world...?
Actually it's not as simple as that.
If it's a real person who's over 18 but looks 12 it will still be legal.
If it's a real person who's 17 but looks 20, it will still be legal.
If it's a fictional character that is 50 but looks 12, it's illegal.
If it's a fictional character that is 18 according to the swedish version of the game but 17 according to every other version of the game then most likely it would be illegal as it would be clear that the age was changed simply to avoid the swedish legal system.
Of course, IANAL but I am swedish.
Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
Speak for yourself, I want my grave to be made of glass so I can look up girls' dresses after I die.
The law in question fucked over a professional manga translator in sweden recently due to you know, tentacle porn or something.
To get the law tested some guys on the swedish anti-establishment forum of flashback(.org) planned to sue the swedish distributor for child pornography distribution once the game was out, which might've been what triggered this hesitation from nintento.
So sweden joins the club of countries where you can go to prison for being skilled with a pen.
Make them 18!
Norway has ties to the EU through various treaties which force most of the EU laws on Norwegian citizens anyway.
There's a game with the word "Dead" in its name, and people have a problem with it because you can look up women's skirts?
PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
You've got to be kidding me... This is so ridiculous I can't believe it's real.
It's a video game. They aren't real people. It's pixels on a screen. No child is being harmed, regardless of where you position the camera.
I also doubt if there's much to look at under those skirts. I doubt if the developers spent much time rendering realistic genitalia that'll likely never be seen... And if they were seen, would just generate outrage.
Further, they're 17 in the game. Here in the US that's just one year shy of legal adulthood. Are you telling me that there's some magical transformation on your 18th birthday that renders you immune to the psychological harm of somebody looking at your crotch?
But even if we accept that this is some kind of virtual child pornography that's somehow exploiting underage pixels... If we really want to make sure we protect the children... It's somehow OK to brutally beat them to a pulp? I mean, Dead or Alive is a fighting game. A "beat'em up". Like Tekken or Soul Calibur or Mortal Combat or Street Fighter... It's OK to pummel some virtual 17-year-old girl into a bloody mess, but it isn't OK to look up her skirt? How does that make any kind of sense?
"Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde
Next time just let their skirts ride up a bit while they get gunned down with the blood splattering the screen from the inside. That should be ok.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
This is the fundamental flaw with all fictional-child-porn laws. They are not based on the principle of protecting people from mistreatment, but on the principle that people should not be allowed to imagine mistreating someone. This is literally a victimless crime.
And because there is no objective defense against the charges – you cannot produce a legal ID that confirms whether or not the subject was a certain age or not – it is impossible for a citizen to be certain he's complying. I think the character looks 20; somebody else thinks she looks 15. The distinction is 100% subjective. There's a principle in US law (and other countries' too I'm sure) that states that a person must be able to determine for themselves ahead of time whether what they are about to do is legal or not. Ignorance of the law is no excuse of course, but if you (or qualified legal counsel) read the law but still can't tell from it whether what you're thinking of doing will be legal or not... that's an invalid and unenforceable – and rather obviously unjust – law.
Most countries that have an age of consent that is less than 18 still consider it child pornography if it contains somebody under 18. That is, just because it's legal to fuck somebody who is 17 doesn't mean its legal to see them naked. I don't know if that's how it works in Scandinavia, but that's how it is in Canada. You can have sex with a 17 year old, but if you get them to webcam naked you're both going away for a long time. She'll probably get the worst of it because you just are in possession of child pornography, but SHE is manufacturing AND distributing it.
ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
Now, I'm not that big into Japanese culture. But from what I gather they're not really that "obsessed" with young girls. Not any more than the Dutch are obsessed with dope. Or the average US person with guns.
We just perceive it that way because we get told a lot that these things are legal there while being illegal where we live and our sensationalist media show us that Japanese businessman who buys little girl panties, the Dutch dopehead who smokes one blunt after another in a coffeeshop and the gun-toting redneck enjoying his afternoon with a machine gun.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Let's hope the game doesn't allow them to drink, watch an R-rated movie, vote or pick up a firearm.
Also being minors, they can't be in the game for more than the allowed working hours for minors.
Perhaps somebody from Social Services should stand behind every player to be sure.
Two points:
1) What you describe is a stereotype of Japanese culture, which may have a grain of truth behind it, but is based on a rather limited familiarity with that culture, and is not generally true. Japan punishes actual child sexual abuse, much like any other modern industrial country does.
2) What you do see, that gives you this impression, is an example of the unintended consequences of censorship. Japan's culture has its own flavor of prudery, which enacted laws intended to stop the publication of sexually indecent images. One key provision of this was "no images in which pubic hair is visible". But rather than stopping artists and photographers from showing nekkid females, it merely stopped them from showing nekkid females with pubic hair. Which makes them look a bit like children, and in the minds of some Japanese men, has eroticized those childlike features.
But like I said, most Japanese men have no interest in sex with little girls. They may indulge in school-girl fantasies and role-play, they may want their female partners to sport the hairless look of the porn they grew up beating off to. They are obsessed with youth Just Like American Men. But the Japanese are not (as a culture) obsessed with molesting young girls.
Pornography and having sex isn't the same thing.
The retarded thing is that child-pornographic FICTION is a crime.
Who gives a shit about drawings? Murder, violence and so on in fiction form isn't crimes.
Over reaction and 100% retarded.
Fortunately US law does not define porn as "something able to excite someone". For one thing, it doesn't define "porn" at all. Second, the definition of "obscenity" (which might be what you're thinking of) is more complex than that. One part of the definition (known as the Miller Test) is that the material as a whole has to serve to excite someone, so the fact that the judge got a stiffy during the two-minute bedroom scene in Generic Romantic Comedy VIII doesn't cut it. Also, it has to depict the sex in a clearly offensive way. And finally, it has to have no redeeming literary/artistic/political/scientific value, which is a part of the test that even XXX-rated porn movies are able to pass.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
It's true - just like Muslim extremists flip a shit over drawings of Muhammed, the Western world does likewise over images of child sexuality.
We're just as bad as them.
I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
It works like that in Sweden too, and it is because of international agreements. The age of consent is 15, but you're pretty much not allowed to watch the act you're partaking in because now we have laws aginst actually watching child pornography too.
c++;
That's good and nice for the US law.
Our porn doesn't have to have any "values", it just must not be obscene, exploitative or contrary to society's values in terms of sexuality. The advantage is that you don't have to redefine your porn laws every time your society changes its values. The drawback is that it's kinda dependent on the judge to determine whether it's within the legal limit or not.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Actually, we have the pirate bay, so I'm sure we'll find it eventually.
c++;
At what age do men stop looking up girls dresses? Does it really matter?
I'm not even male yet even I do that, too!
This is Nintendo overreacting to some ass hat Swede who threatened with a lawsuit.
Denmark has some of the worlds most liberal laws regarding pornography and game violence, granted, we don't allow child pornography - but we do for instance allow models from age 16 as long as they have their parents consent (and supervision) to pose nude.
At no point would anyone consider throwing the book at Nintendo for making a game where you can see up a skirt on a 17 year old cartoon player.
(It has become illegal to poses cartoons portraying child pornography here, but again - emphasis on pornography - a naked child does not porno make).
clearly offensive
That isn't much better at all as it's also subjective.
literary/artistic
And these, too.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
I think we're worse, because we believe we're more civilized and cultured than they are.
I would imagine they view themselves the same way. Anyone on any sort of moral crusade always thinks they're standing on the high ground. They might not choose the words "civilized" or "cultured" though, maybe something like "enlightened".
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
It's true - just like Muslim extremists flip a shit over drawings of Muhammed, the Western world does likewise over images of child sexuality.
We're just as bad as them.
No, we're not. While it is offensive to some, drawing of Muhammad hurts nobody among civilized people; images of child sexuality feed the lusts of depraved individuals to the extent they are compelled to act, or think we are complicit with them in their abuse of children, Have at least half a brain, or half a heart or both for crying out loud.
no comment
If it's a real person who's 17 but looks 20, it will still be legal.
Not quite. If the model's age is known, it's child porn if he/she is under 18. If the model's age is unknown, it's child porn if he/she looks under 18.
In practice, the law is used to lessen the burden of proof. The prosecutor just needs to prove the model looks under 18, and then it's up to the accused to find the model and prove he/she was over 18 at the time of photography.
(Yes, I'm Swedish too)
What difference would that make? The legal age for consent in Scandinavia is not 18. This story doesn't make any sense.
It's Swedish law which doesn't make sense. The age of consent is 15 in Sweden, while depiction of persons under 18 is considered child porn. Additionally, if the model's age is unknown, the prosecutor only needs to prove he/she appears to be under 18.
images of child sexuality feed the lusts of depraved individuals to the extent they are compelled to act, or think we are complicit with them in their abuse of children
Do you have even one peer-reviewed citation for that? Your claim seems to have as much scientific backing as a claim that a drawing of Muhammad angers Allah and imperils the immortal soul of anyone who sees it.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Considering the short amount of time that the 3DS has been out, these characters are not even a year old yet, although they are masquerading as characters that are much older. In fact, this would apply to all characters in the game, not just the three "teenagers" mentioned.
Therefore, not only could this be construed as child pornography, but it could also be said to actively encourage pedophilia!
I trust that the absurdity of this argument makes my underlying point apparent. If not, I will try to emphasize it now:
They are computer graphics, and are not real
I don't condone child pornography for one minute, but if even the appearance of it is illegal where it clearly isn't actually happening, then something is wholly F*'ed up.
For crying out loud, if fictional sexually oriented depictions of minors are illegal, then ought it not to also be illegal for a person of majority to make themselves appear much younger than they are and engage in any sexual act? And if the latter is reasonable to be legal, then I can see no even slightly coherent reason to outlaw the former.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Pedantry is its own reward.
They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.
I'm not even male yet...
Will you after you are?
At what age do men stop looking up girls dresses? Does it really matter?
I'm not even male yet even I do that, too!
With the screen name, "Gaygirlie" should I find this surprising? ;-)
It's weird, but a quick google will show the age of consent in those countries is 15 & 16.
So how is looking up the skirts of a 17 year old possible child porn?
They aren't children at that age in those countries.
Not to mention, it's not real people.
Seriously, wtf!
Be seeing you...
We had some merchants in the temple pretending to be a Christian "family" group in Australia pushing the line that any breast size under a D cup was child porn even if the performer was over 40 years old.
These sort of rules are an insane waste of time by any measure.
Only twelve! And it's amputee porn you sicko!