Actually, a shareholder lawsuit isn't out of the question. It seems pretty clear, from the publicly-available material, that RIM management fucked the case up through sheer incompetence.
I work for a media organisation in Australia. I am required to possess certification from the Office of Film and Literature Classification (the government body at the centre of this controversy) attesting to the fact that I have been trained in and understand the application of the OFLC's classification criteria. I have a nice little certificate here with a government seal on it attesting to the fact that I am qualified to make judgements on the most appropriate classification for a piece of content.
There's no way this game should have been "Refused Classification" (ie, banned). No way. Hell, even Manhunt for PS2, featuring sadistic snuff-movie murders, did not get banned.
Now, video games can be banned from Australia they: (a) depict, express or otherwise deal with matters of sex, drug misuse or addiction, crime, cruelty, violence or revolting or abhorrent phenomena in such a way that they offend against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults to the extent that they should not be classified; or
(b) describe or depict in a way that is likely to cause offence to a reasonable adult, a person who is, or appears to be, a child under 18 (whether the person is engaged in sexual activity or not); or
(c) promote, incite or instruct in matters of crime or violence; or
(d) are unsuitable for a minor to see or play
The OFLC's own guidelines specify further that a game should be Refused Classification if it shows "Detailed instruction or promotion in matters of crime or violence".
BUT.
According to the OFLC "assessed titles" database, the game was examined and assessed back in November last year and given an MA-15 rating. Unless Ecko has released a patch in the past 60 days which makes the game more offensive, I think it's safe to assume some politician who wants his name in the papers for "THINKING ABOUT THE CHILDREN" has pulled strings to have the classification changed.
The Red Cross on white background was the original protection symbol declared at the 1864 Geneva Convention. It is, in terms of its color, a reversal of the Swiss national flag, a meaning which was adopted to honor Swiss founder Henry Dunant and his home country. The ideas to introduce a uniform and neutral protection symbol as well as its specific design originally came from Dr. Louis Appia and General Henri Dufour, founding members of the International Committee
Yep. I can't believe this is posted as something newsworthy. This is going in my list of articles to send people who are considering subscribing to Slashdot.
No, it sounds like a Judge who just realized he's been lied to by one of the parties in the court. I'm actually impressed at how calmly the judge handled it -- I've seen others have meltdowns at such deceit.
Re:Glad this wasn't settled out of court
on
RIM - The Whole Story
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
RIM made the thing, NTP didn't. RIM assumed the risks, the marketing and production costs, built the infrastructure, and filled in all the other gaps that were required to make the product a reality.
No disagreement there. But RIM should have performed due diligence in researching applicable patents before launching the BlackBerry. RIM should have responded in a reasonable way in a reasonable timeframe when NTP notified it of the possible infringement.
This bit deserves to be in bold: RIM shouldn't have lied to the court and said it HAD responded to NTP's notification when it hadn't.
This bit deserves to be in mile-high flaming letters: RIM shouldn't have attempted to deceive the judge and jury with a faked demonstration in the courtroom.
Yeah, a better place, so long as you're not being oppressed by a dictatorial government that Google wants to do business with. Then you're just fodder for Google's corporate greed.
No Tibet or Tiananmen on Google's new Chinese site By Dan Sabbagh, Media Editor
GOOGLE will today cave in to pressure from the Chinese Government by launching a local website that strips out information not approved by the Communist authorities. The company, whose motto is "Don't be evil", is launching a version of its site that restricts Chinese people from searching for information about Tibetan independence or the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre.
"In order to operate from China, we have removed some content from the search results available on Google.cn, in response to local law, regulation or policy," the internet company said in a statement issued yesterday.
Slashdot Mirror
Need to see who's calling you so you can know whether or not you need to speak to them? Open the phone.
Don't need to speak to them? Too late! You just answered the phone!
In the real world we don't call that "chutzpah". We call that "retarded".
Yeah, RIM deserved everything it got.
Actually, a shareholder lawsuit isn't out of the question. It seems pretty clear, from the publicly-available material, that RIM management fucked the case up through sheer incompetence.
Only in a thread about Linux drivers could the solution to a non-working printer be BUY A NEW PRINTER.
Since VHS was cheaper, porn movies were available on it faster. Once VHS became the format on which you could get porn, the battle was over.
If they want to make a difference, how about investing money into good civics lessons in the countries wracked by violence.
If they want to make a difference, they should invest money into good civics lessons in THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
Hell, civics lessons of any sort would do.
I work for a media organisation in Australia. I am required to possess certification from the Office of Film and Literature Classification (the government body at the centre of this controversy) attesting to the fact that I have been trained in and understand the application of the OFLC's classification criteria. I have a nice little certificate here with a government seal on it attesting to the fact that I am qualified to make judgements on the most appropriate classification for a piece of content.
There's no way this game should have been "Refused Classification" (ie, banned). No way. Hell, even Manhunt for PS2, featuring sadistic snuff-movie murders, did not get banned.
Now, video games can be banned from Australia they:
(a) depict, express or otherwise deal with matters of sex, drug misuse or addiction, crime, cruelty, violence or revolting or abhorrent phenomena in such a way that they offend against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults to the extent that they should not be classified; or
(b) describe or depict in a way that is likely to cause offence to a reasonable adult, a person who is, or appears to be, a child under 18 (whether the person is engaged in sexual activity or not); or
(c) promote, incite or instruct in matters of crime or violence; or
(d) are unsuitable for a minor to see or play
The OFLC's own guidelines specify further that a game should be Refused Classification if it shows "Detailed instruction or promotion in matters of crime or violence".
BUT.
According to the OFLC "assessed titles" database, the game was examined and assessed back in November last year and given an MA-15 rating. Unless Ecko has released a patch in the past 60 days which makes the game more offensive, I think it's safe to assume some politician who wants his name in the papers for "THINKING ABOUT THE CHILDREN" has pulled strings to have the classification changed.
I always thought it was simply a color-reversed representation of the Swiss flag.
OK, so it was only the bad guys that shot at medical personnel in America's wars? Cool. That's a relief.
Yep. I can't believe this is posted as something newsworthy. This is going in my list of articles to send people who are considering subscribing to Slashdot.
From now on, please refer to the Moon-landing theory .
Thanks,
Another Bush appointee.
"Dear British researchers,
Why are you investigating these questions when the answer to each is obviously 'because that's the way Jesus wants it'?
Yours,
The United States of America"
Wheee! This is awesome. A large powerful nation giving itself a lobotomy.
Pass the popcorn!
Oh, it's GOOOOOOD!
No, it sounds like a Judge who just realized he's been lied to by one of the parties in the court. I'm actually impressed at how calmly the judge handled it -- I've seen others have meltdowns at such deceit.
RIM made the thing, NTP didn't. RIM assumed the risks, the marketing and production costs, built the infrastructure, and filled in all the other gaps that were required to make the product a reality.
No disagreement there. But RIM should have performed due diligence in researching applicable patents before launching the BlackBerry. RIM should have responded in a reasonable way in a reasonable timeframe when NTP notified it of the possible infringement.
This bit deserves to be in bold: RIM shouldn't have lied to the court and said it HAD responded to NTP's notification when it hadn't.
This bit deserves to be in mile-high flaming letters: RIM shouldn't have attempted to deceive the judge and jury with a faked demonstration in the courtroom.
Seriously, that's f**king retarded.
Did you actually read the article? Looks to me like RIM is getting what it deserves.
Pixar has made a lot of Videogame spinoffs on their own. Toy Story 1 & 2, Nemo, you name it.
Correction: DISNEY has made a lot of videogame spinoffs.
Yeah, a better place, so long as you're not being oppressed by a dictatorial government that Google wants to do business with. Then you're just fodder for Google's corporate greed.
even the Emperor's New Groove wasn't that bad
No, it was. I challeng you to watch anything made by Pixar and then TENG from start to finish. You won't be able to do it - TENG is a stinking turd.
Oh, btw:
There's a lot of Kool-Aid being consumed around here.
Mod parent up.
Chuck? Is that you?
I wonder: the author of the source article, the editor of Ars Technica, the Slashdot editor who posted this... have any of them actually USED Gmail?
I can only assume the answer is no.