The problem I see with that is that most people who have a broadband connection (around here, at least) automatically have dialup service anyway. Perhaps this varies in other places (I honestly don't know). But most broadband ISPs here throw in free dialup access as part of any DSL or cable plan. Just dial in to a nationwide number using the same credentials as you'd normally use for your PPPoE/PPPoA broadband connection. Costs the ISP almost nothing and people almost never actually ~use~ the service (most probably don't even realise they have it). But it's handy when you're somewhere remote or for some reason your broadband link is down etc.
For the same reason as the front camera: video-chat.
"Hi Bob, how's it going? Oh man, I gotta show you this sweet new I bought, here check it out"
This is much better than flipping the whole iPad around:
- It's quicker and doesnt involve 5 seconds of random wobbly video for the other end; and
- You can still see the other guy while showing him something that's in front of you, rather than getting up close and personal with the serial number on the back of the device instead;)
Genuine question: who'd want a 7 inch tablet? That sounds like a device that can't quite make its mind up whether it's trying to be an oversized phone, or a tablet. Slightly to small for easy browsing of web pages at a comfortable distance and resolution. But too large to really be called 'portable' in the same way as a phone. Not to mention that if you keep the same internal components, but reduce the size down to 7 inches, the battery life is going to have to be reduced.
Not denying that people want this or trying to justify Apple's decisions, but I'm just curious what the use cases for a 7 inch device are. To me, you either want something to be portable (phone-sized), or to give you a full-resolution experience close to what a computer could do (web, e-books, VNC, etc). This seems... too inbetween.
As for the other stuff:
USB port: Yeah I'll agree with that. I personally have no use for one but I can easily see why many do want this, and would love to see it. However, knowing Apple, I wouldn't hold your breath.
Wireless sync: Again, I can see how this would be nice but honestly I don't find connecting a cable that onerous. Definitely wouldn't complain if they added it though!
Lower price: Actually the iPad 2 wlll retail for less than the iPad 1 in my country. This is mostly because the US dollar is MUCH weaker now than a year ago, and hence the local currency is stronger. Apple, like most multinationals, does its bookkeeping and revenue recognition in USD, so this means they can offer it at a cheaper local price this year.
Agreed. The iPad 2 is an incremental upgrade, and as you say I think is designed to suck in more first-time buyers, rather than get existing iPad owners to upgrade.
The reason I think that is because I'm one of those buyers. I saw the original iPad come out last year, liked it, but wait... no camera. That right there killed it for me. One of the primary things I want to do with it is video-Skype to family and friends overseas. I do this now on a laptop (and also on the iPhone 4 now that it has a front-facing camera too). But the iPad is a nicer way to do it (especially if I can give one to my tech-incompetent parents and say, "just press this button and you can see me and talk to me", rather than "turn the laptop on, wait a few mins, type your password, double click this icon down here... no not that one, the other one, the blue one with the S... oh what's this bloody webcam/microphone setup wizard?? oh and no I don't know what that random popup is for either, just ignore it...)
So now it has a camera, I can do this. The CPU boost and thinner form factor is a bonus. iPad 2 is what I was expecting from the first iPad, so I'll finally buy one. But if I already had one, this would not be worth upgrading to. It's not a huge upgrade.
No it's not feasible. As you say the only way to 'upgrade' the iPad's screen is to do pixel-doubling ala the iPhone 4 display. However, on a screen the size of the iPad's, you'd require pretty hefty graphics hardware to drive such a display. So most people with a brain realised a long time ago that the iPad 2 wasn't going to have a higher rez display. The only improvement in the iPad 2's display is that the backlight is now LED.
A 'retina' style display for iPad might happen with iPad 3 though. Seems to me that iPad 1 -> is an incremental upgrade only, like the iPhone 3G - 3GS. The big leap will be next year on the iPad 3 (or whatever they will call it), like the jump from 3GS -> 4 in the phones.
Mod parent up. I've been trying to get this point across on this thread all evening. RC is not banned. It is not censored. RC content itself is not illegal, it is simply ~unrated~, so stores can't sell it due to the existing (outdated) laws. But you can get it by other means and are perfectly free to do so, and free to own and use that content howsoever you please.
Why would importing games (or anything else for that matter) be illegal? It's perfectly fine. Hell most gamers in Australia import their games ANYWAY, even if they aren't refused classification, because they are much cheaper than local prices! Not to mention stores like Amazon do a massive trade here. Amazon doesn't have an Australian presence or site, but they have no problems with Australians ordering on the US or UK site and shipping stuff here.
Only thing you need to check is that the copy of the game you're getting will work on your console. This differs by console a bit: the PS3 and DS for isntance aren't region locked, so they are pretty safe. Wii has 'regions' but they are essentially just divided by PAL or NTSC countries, so anything from New Zealand, Europe etc is fine. PC games are fine from anywhere... they have no form of region coding etc.
Americans love to bash us for being a 'less free country', but frankly, there appears to be more freedom-destroying laws on the books in the US than there is in Australia. We can import whatever we want. Modchipping our consoles is legal. DVD players are region unlocked by law (yes, all of them, from the $50 one to the $1000 one), meaning we can play (and buy) discs from any country. So our classification laws are a bit antiquated, sure. But that'll get fixed. And in the meantime, there's plenty of techy stuff we have the freedom to do here that is technically against the law in the US. So you win some, and you lose some.
OK, I'll agree with you that it wasn't entirely 'an oversight'. Much of it did come from (as I mentioned) an ideological position that some politicians have. I'm sure R was omitted 'on purpose', because they thought they could get away with it for games (but obviously couldn't get away with it for films... remember this is the early 90s we are talking about here: films were mainstream, games not so much yet).
However, please note that the problem cannot be fixed by the method you outline (which is why it ~hasn't~ been fixed yet). It can't be done with a regular Bill. The Australian Government themselves can't fix this, even if they wanted to (and the current Federal government ~has~ expressed support for the idea).
It's the Attorneys General of each of Australia's ~States~ that have to (unanimously) agree to change the ratings. That is, politicians from 8 separate jurisdictions have to come together and agree. They only have such meetings every now and again, and needless to say, getting 8 different people to unanimously agree to something is a lot harder than passing a Bill in a single (Federal) jurisdiction that just requires a standard majority in the House and Senate.
Actually we used to be on that list every year;) That changed when the US FTA came in a few years ago. One of the things the FTA did was introduce certain aspects of US copyright law into Australia. And since then we've been absent from the list.
Of course, bundling in these evil US IP laws was a travesty. But it was a non-negotiable requirement from the US' point of view, driven mostly by the pharmaceutical companies (you can bet the fact we have universal health care with a cap of $22.50 on prescription drugs under the PBS pisses them off no end), and media companies. It's a real shame because the FTA isn't all a bad news story - it has benefitted quite a few exporters and importers in both countries. However we had to sell a bit of our soul (in the form of our less restrictive IP laws) in order to get it.
Customs can technically seize it. Technically, Customs can seize anything they want though, at their complete discretion. So RC games are just like any other object coming over the border in that respect.
In truth though Customs are really only interested in actual illegal stuff. Drugs. Child porn. And most deadly of all... EVIL DISEASE-CARRYING FRUIT!:P
There are thousands upon thousands of RC games bought from overseas every year and I have never heard of a single one having a problem with customs. The box'll be marked 'software' or 'computer game' like eleventy billion other packages they they deal with every year. The chances of you having a problem are so close to nil it's not funny. I've done it dozens of times and never had even a hint of a problem.
It's hard to see how you can say it's 'banned' if mere ownership of the item is perfectly OK. 'Banned' would imply that you shouldn't have the item, no matter how you got it. Refused Classification only means Aussie retailers can't put it on their shelves, because it doesn't have the little ratings sticker that it needs to have. But there is nothing stopping you downloading it, importing it etc. And once it's in your hand it's perfectly, utterly legal to play it as much as you want. The law in question here is a ~retail~ law - that you can't sell something that isn't carrying a valid ratings sticker. But the game itself is not illegal, banned, or any other similar word you might use.
It's not ~really~ spin-doctoring. There are genuine differences between this situation, and a situation of genuine government censorship. Namely, intent. The problem in Australia has arisen due to an inconsistency in the law, not through any active desire to censor or ban content. Indeed, the current government has publicly expressed their support for getting the problem fixed and introducing an R18 rating for games. And it will happen... but legislative change takes time.
It is important to understand exactly the mechanism at work here, and how it differs from an actual ban. RC content is not banned. It is perfectly legal to own and play an RC game, or any other 'refused classification' content (except in WA and some areas of NT). There is no active desire on the part of the government to 'ban' this game or any other game. The content is not illegal - it merely doesn't fit within any of the defined rating categories and hence is unrated.
The situation is as follows:
- Media sold in Australia needs to carry a rating (generally a physical sticker). The ratings are: G, PG, M15+, MA15+, R18+, X18+. Media that doesn't have a rating cannot be sold (regardless of its content... it could be aimed at preschoolers for what it's worth, but if it ain't got the sticker, you aren't permitted to put it on the store shelves). This is a point of difference cf. the US: US classifications are voluntary, whereas they are compulsory here. But that in itself isn't an issue provided you have a range of classifications to apply that encompass all content.
- However, the ratings system is quite old. Back when it was developed, the opinion was that 'only kids play games'. Therefore, the X18 and R18 ratings that exist for film, literature and any other type of media, were not included in the available ratings for games. This is partly an oversight, partly a lack of thought as to how this would effect things in the future (when gamers were mostly adult) and yes, partly driven by some polticians' ideologies.
- Result: games that have content that doesn't fit into MA15+ or lower must be refused classification. Again, this does not make the game ILLEGAL. It is not 'banned'. Australian stores simply can't ~sell~ it. So people that want to play the game will just have to buy from overseas/download from Steam/etc.
The Classifications Board themselves are big supporters of fixing the system so that the existing R rating can be applied to games. They'd love to be able to whack an R rating on it and let it through. But they can only work with the ratings that have been given to them to use.
This (importing it from retailers overseas) is exactly what every Aussie already does with every other RC game. It's a big reason why the lack of an R18 rating is so utterly stupid and pointless. Hell, I buy most of my games from overseas anyway because they are cheaper than buying them locally, even including shipping.
And amusingly enough, your other suggestion has happened in the past! The original Duke Nukem 3D was initially refused classification in Australia. They then released a modified version for Australia, without the blood and girls, which got through fine. They then published a small and easy to apply patch on the web that put the removed content back in, which 99.9% of people downloaded. All perfectly legal! (RC stuff itself isn't illegal to own in most Australian States - it just can't be sold on retail shelves... so selling a modified copy and publishing a free patch on the web is fine)/facepalm
Lack of R18 rating has the following effects:
- Doesn't stop anyone playing the game, since they just import it anyway;
- Means local retailers miss out on revenue, with the gamers' dollars going to overseas retailers instead;
- Often sees games that are rated R in every other country getting squeezed in under the MA15 rating, meaning that 15-17 year olds are being exposed to R content anyway (negating the effect of the law in the first place!);
- Irritates the classification board no end: they know perfectly well how retarded the system is and themselves are big proponents of introducing an R rating for games... but in the meantime they can only work with the ratings that exist; and
- Is generally just a stupid, needlessly inconsistent law (considering that movies, books and other media can be given R18 or X18 ratings... games are the only things treated differently)
BTW, for console games (which the new MK is) you generally have to import from an NZ or European retailer due to the region coding on the discs and the PAL/NTSC issue. For PC games, US retailers are usually the way to go (cheapest).
The Australian Reserve Bank is pretty good actually. Keep in mind Australia was the only OECD country not to go into recession during the global financial crisis. A big part of that admittedly was the fact that we didn't lend money to people that couldn't possibly repay it, and the Govt. was running a modest surplus rather than the massive deficit present in many other countries. However, the Reserve Bank also has a part to play in managing the economy and has, on balance, done a pretty good job of it over the last decade or two.
That ~would~ be me. Can't standing having 'mess' around, even if it's virtual. The 'full bin' icon would bug me and I'd probably empty it straight away after deleting a file....that is if I used it in the first place. I always shift-delete so stuff never makes it into the bin in the first place. I have a decent rolling backup system if I really make an error. But I haven't needed it in a long time - I always think twice before deleting.
Thing is, Korea is a country where most content people demand is hosted domestically. ISPs can reach a much larger percentage of the demanded hosts without crossing to transit or peering networks. Australia OTOH is a very unusual beast in the world of provisioning internet: it's English-speaking, but far from where most English speaking content is hosted (North America, and to a lesser extent the UK). Something like 90% of traffic is international. Few other countries on earth have that pattern of demand (NZ and South Africa do, and they are capped worse than we are). But for places like Japan, Korea, or even the US for that matter, international traffic demand for residential ISPs is pretty low.
Given that reserving capacity on undersea cables is relatively expensive for ISPs, it is unlikely that Australia will see an end to data caps in the near term. It really is in a rather unique situation of being physically large, far from everywhere (particularly from where the content is we want is hosted), and having a low population.
That is not to excuse the situation though - I agree it'd be nice to get rid of the caps. And I think we are moving in that direction fairly quickly. We now have 1GB+ plans available (and some genuinely unlimited plans such as TPGs, although only available in certain areas). So the situation is MUCH better than it was even a year or two ago. I can easily see unlimited or multi-terabyte-cap plans becoming the norm within the next 5-10 years.
Although frankly, 95% of users won't really notice. The proportion of customers that consume more than even 100GB/month is tiny. Hell, I live on the Internet 24/7 and I only use ~30GB/month (although I do use a fair chunk of my ISPs unmetered content, so if you included that it'd be more like 50-60GB). The thing that will really change this is widespread adoption of IPTV (which I feel is going to happen)... although ISPs that offer it now count IPTV as unmetered traffic anyway so it's a moot point...
Thing is, you're one of the VERY lucky ones. I would kill for your speeds. I live 3 km from the CBD of Canberra and the fastest speed I can obtain, via any means, is ~6Mbit (downstream). Relatives of mine in Brisbane are in a similar situation: they live in a central, relatively affluent suburb, but due to their distance from the exchange get poor speeds. 6Mbit is by no means 'terrible' - it's fine for gaming and everyday usage. But more will be needed in the very near future (and I'd love faster upload speeds than the 1 Mbit I get now... uploading a roll of photos to Flickr takes hours!)
Virtually anywhere that doesn't have cable (i.e. everywhere other than select areas of Syd/Mel/Bris) or isn't very close to the exchange has rubbish speeds. Can't wait for faster speeds to be available. Frankly I don't care if it's the NBN or a private company or aliens from outer space that provide it, I just want it:P
An ISP can already disconnect you for any damn reason it sees fit (under their TOS). They have always been able to do this, and it has nothing to do with the this particular judgement. In fact, it makes the likelyhood of disconnection by your ISP LESS because ISPs no longer have to fear they will be held responsible for piracy and simply disconnect people 'to be safe'. It must now be investigated through a proper due process.
Plus, unlike in the US, there's typically 30+ ISPs to choose from in most given areas. You'd have to be trying pretty hard to get disconnected from them all.
Er no they don't ban movies like that, ~because an R rating exists in Australia for film~. So there is no problem.
The problem is that, for games, the highest valid rating is MA15+. So something that would be happily classified as R and released without issue, if it were a film, must be refused classification if it's a game but can't fit into the MA15+ category. Note that I say 'refused classification', rather than 'banned'. I can buy it from an importer if I want. But to be sold in an Australian retail store, it must carry a valid Australian classification.
Yeah it's a stupid inconsistency between the rating scheme for film and for games. It is in the process of being changed but is taking a while. I firmly believe we'll get an R rating for games in the next few years (in fact, we almost got one earlier this year... but they deferred the decision to a later meeting). Just gotta grin and bear it until then.
They didn't 'ban' Mortal Kombat either. It was refused classification, meaning that Australian retailers can't ~sell~ it. Merely possessing a copy isn't an issue.
Anyway, as you rightly allude to, the problem in Australia is not that is that content is treated inconsistently. It's that games are 'missing' the R18 rating that exists for film, literature and other media. When they designed the video games rating system way back in the early 90s, they basically assumed that, since games were for kids, no rating higher than MA15+ was needed. Whereas for film, literature and other media, the ratings include an R18 rating. So films like Wolf Creek are still OK. But video games that are deemed unsuitable for 15-17 year olds must unfortunately be refused classification.
Note that the classification board itself is as irritated about this state of affairs as the public is. It's not their fault: they can only operate with the rating criteria they have been given to work with. They aren't on a moral crusade to ban things for the hell of it - they simply couldn't validly fit it into the MA15+ rating. The wheels are in motion to get a R18 classification for games happening (to bring them into line with film etc.), but like anything in politics, it takes a long time:(
In the meantime I'll just import this game like everyone else. No big deal. Usually cheaper to buy games from overseas anyway.
It's worth a read, or a skim at least. The judges were entirely reasonable in their dismissal and actually do seem to grasp the technical side of the case quite well (no doubt assisted by iiNet having some excellent technical witnesses/advisors during the trial). Overall it's a very good outcome for Australian Internet users, and confirms the very high level of consumer protection in this country compared to many other places.
The concession to the film industry that will now allow them to legitimately send infringement notices with the potential to disconnect users is OK. There is a heavy onus placed on the film industry to come up with all the evidence, show that it's relevant and pay for the ISPs time to investigate. Further, if the disconnection is later found to be unwarranted, it is the film industry that bears all responsibility and liability, not the ISP. So although there is now a prescribed path the film industry can take to disconnect people, the barriers to doing so are high, which sound reduce frivolous claims and make sure they really only go after that large-scale uploaders, not every man and his dog that occasionally downloads a film or two.
Interesting how I've seen this news on so many sites, and they all report it with overwhelmingly positive headlines... except Slashdot. Slashdot is the only site I've seen that somehow seems to wrangle this into a NEGATIVE sounding headling. Is it just me or is/. turning into the grumpy old man that likes to complain about everything and is constantly trying to push their agenda onto other people...
While you are absolutely correct in your premise that Earth has a major problem with overfishing (some would even say, a crisis), and that we need to significantly reduce our catch, to say that we simply 'aren't supposed to eat them' is a bit rich. Humans developed tools, such as spears for fishing in rivers and shallow coastal areas, for catching fish very early on in our evolution. We've been eating them for hundreds of thousands of years, so even if we weren't meant to eat them originally, I think we can say they are a natural and acceptable food source for us now.
To take that a step further, we can't run down and kill many land-based animals with our bare hands either. We developed tools (bows and arrows, spears, boomerangs, you name it) to hunt them. Are we 'not supposed' to eat them either?
Offtopic, but that is a very interesting link you have posted, and to my eye, looks correct.
I'm a dual Australian and American citizen, so am familiar with the politics of both countries and the recent debates re health care in the US. In Australia we have universal, single-payer health care and like 99% of people here I believe that is a good thing. However, your link led me to take a look at the constitutional situation with regards to healthcare matters here. The Australian Constitution is not dissimilar to the US one - both set up a system of Federal Govt. with certain powers, with other powers remaining with the States.
Lo and behold, implementing Australia's universal healthcare system DID require a change to the Constitution:
That is the Australian equivalent of section 8 of the US Constitution, setting out the powers of the Federal Government. Cast your eye down it and you will see one that breaks the normal numbering scheme - between paragraph 23 and 24 you have a random paragraph 'xxiiiA' that allows them to legislate regarding healthcare. It was indeed inserted to allow UHC to be implemented in Australia in the mid-70s.
Given this, and given the large scale similarities with the US Consititution, it does indeed seem as if any such system implemented in America would require section 8 of the US Constitution to be amended. Interesting how this is an issue that has seemingly been overlooked in the debate.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem I see with that is that most people who have a broadband connection (around here, at least) automatically have dialup service anyway. Perhaps this varies in other places (I honestly don't know). But most broadband ISPs here throw in free dialup access as part of any DSL or cable plan. Just dial in to a nationwide number using the same credentials as you'd normally use for your PPPoE/PPPoA broadband connection. Costs the ISP almost nothing and people almost never actually ~use~ the service (most probably don't even realise they have it). But it's handy when you're somewhere remote or for some reason your broadband link is down etc.
For the same reason as the front camera: video-chat.
"Hi Bob, how's it going? Oh man, I gotta show you this sweet new I bought, here check it out"
This is much better than flipping the whole iPad around:
- It's quicker and doesnt involve 5 seconds of random wobbly video for the other end; and
- You can still see the other guy while showing him something that's in front of you, rather than getting up close and personal with the serial number on the back of the device instead ;)
Genuine question: who'd want a 7 inch tablet? That sounds like a device that can't quite make its mind up whether it's trying to be an oversized phone, or a tablet. Slightly to small for easy browsing of web pages at a comfortable distance and resolution. But too large to really be called 'portable' in the same way as a phone. Not to mention that if you keep the same internal components, but reduce the size down to 7 inches, the battery life is going to have to be reduced.
Not denying that people want this or trying to justify Apple's decisions, but I'm just curious what the use cases for a 7 inch device are. To me, you either want something to be portable (phone-sized), or to give you a full-resolution experience close to what a computer could do (web, e-books, VNC, etc). This seems ... too inbetween.
As for the other stuff:
USB port: Yeah I'll agree with that. I personally have no use for one but I can easily see why many do want this, and would love to see it. However, knowing Apple, I wouldn't hold your breath.
Wireless sync: Again, I can see how this would be nice but honestly I don't find connecting a cable that onerous. Definitely wouldn't complain if they added it though!
Lower price: Actually the iPad 2 wlll retail for less than the iPad 1 in my country. This is mostly because the US dollar is MUCH weaker now than a year ago, and hence the local currency is stronger. Apple, like most multinationals, does its bookkeeping and revenue recognition in USD, so this means they can offer it at a cheaper local price this year.
Agreed. The iPad 2 is an incremental upgrade, and as you say I think is designed to suck in more first-time buyers, rather than get existing iPad owners to upgrade.
The reason I think that is because I'm one of those buyers. I saw the original iPad come out last year, liked it, but wait ... no camera. That right there killed it for me. One of the primary things I want to do with it is video-Skype to family and friends overseas. I do this now on a laptop (and also on the iPhone 4 now that it has a front-facing camera too). But the iPad is a nicer way to do it (especially if I can give one to my tech-incompetent parents and say, "just press this button and you can see me and talk to me", rather than "turn the laptop on, wait a few mins, type your password, double click this icon down here ... no not that one, the other one, the blue one with the S ... oh what's this bloody webcam/microphone setup wizard?? oh and no I don't know what that random popup is for either, just ignore it ...)
So now it has a camera, I can do this. The CPU boost and thinner form factor is a bonus. iPad 2 is what I was expecting from the first iPad, so I'll finally buy one. But if I already had one, this would not be worth upgrading to. It's not a huge upgrade.
No it's not feasible. As you say the only way to 'upgrade' the iPad's screen is to do pixel-doubling ala the iPhone 4 display. However, on a screen the size of the iPad's, you'd require pretty hefty graphics hardware to drive such a display. So most people with a brain realised a long time ago that the iPad 2 wasn't going to have a higher rez display. The only improvement in the iPad 2's display is that the backlight is now LED.
A 'retina' style display for iPad might happen with iPad 3 though. Seems to me that iPad 1 -> is an incremental upgrade only, like the iPhone 3G - 3GS. The big leap will be next year on the iPad 3 (or whatever they will call it), like the jump from 3GS -> 4 in the phones.
Mod parent up. I've been trying to get this point across on this thread all evening. RC is not banned. It is not censored. RC content itself is not illegal, it is simply ~unrated~, so stores can't sell it due to the existing (outdated) laws. But you can get it by other means and are perfectly free to do so, and free to own and use that content howsoever you please.
And that doesn't even touch on the issue of downloading. You can download most new (PC) games from Steam these days. No 'importing' necessary.
Why would importing games (or anything else for that matter) be illegal? It's perfectly fine. Hell most gamers in Australia import their games ANYWAY, even if they aren't refused classification, because they are much cheaper than local prices! Not to mention stores like Amazon do a massive trade here. Amazon doesn't have an Australian presence or site, but they have no problems with Australians ordering on the US or UK site and shipping stuff here.
Only thing you need to check is that the copy of the game you're getting will work on your console. This differs by console a bit: the PS3 and DS for isntance aren't region locked, so they are pretty safe. Wii has 'regions' but they are essentially just divided by PAL or NTSC countries, so anything from New Zealand, Europe etc is fine. PC games are fine from anywhere ... they have no form of region coding etc.
Americans love to bash us for being a 'less free country', but frankly, there appears to be more freedom-destroying laws on the books in the US than there is in Australia. We can import whatever we want. Modchipping our consoles is legal. DVD players are region unlocked by law (yes, all of them, from the $50 one to the $1000 one), meaning we can play (and buy) discs from any country. So our classification laws are a bit antiquated, sure. But that'll get fixed. And in the meantime, there's plenty of techy stuff we have the freedom to do here that is technically against the law in the US. So you win some, and you lose some.
OK, I'll agree with you that it wasn't entirely 'an oversight'. Much of it did come from (as I mentioned) an ideological position that some politicians have. I'm sure R was omitted 'on purpose', because they thought they could get away with it for games (but obviously couldn't get away with it for films ... remember this is the early 90s we are talking about here: films were mainstream, games not so much yet).
However, please note that the problem cannot be fixed by the method you outline (which is why it ~hasn't~ been fixed yet). It can't be done with a regular Bill. The Australian Government themselves can't fix this, even if they wanted to (and the current Federal government ~has~ expressed support for the idea).
It's the Attorneys General of each of Australia's ~States~ that have to (unanimously) agree to change the ratings. That is, politicians from 8 separate jurisdictions have to come together and agree. They only have such meetings every now and again, and needless to say, getting 8 different people to unanimously agree to something is a lot harder than passing a Bill in a single (Federal) jurisdiction that just requires a standard majority in the House and Senate.
Actually we used to be on that list every year ;) That changed when the US FTA came in a few years ago. One of the things the FTA did was introduce certain aspects of US copyright law into Australia. And since then we've been absent from the list.
Of course, bundling in these evil US IP laws was a travesty. But it was a non-negotiable requirement from the US' point of view, driven mostly by the pharmaceutical companies (you can bet the fact we have universal health care with a cap of $22.50 on prescription drugs under the PBS pisses them off no end), and media companies. It's a real shame because the FTA isn't all a bad news story - it has benefitted quite a few exporters and importers in both countries. However we had to sell a bit of our soul (in the form of our less restrictive IP laws) in order to get it.
Customs can technically seize it. Technically, Customs can seize anything they want though, at their complete discretion. So RC games are just like any other object coming over the border in that respect.
In truth though Customs are really only interested in actual illegal stuff. Drugs. Child porn. And most deadly of all ... EVIL DISEASE-CARRYING FRUIT! :P
There are thousands upon thousands of RC games bought from overseas every year and I have never heard of a single one having a problem with customs. The box'll be marked 'software' or 'computer game' like eleventy billion other packages they they deal with every year. The chances of you having a problem are so close to nil it's not funny. I've done it dozens of times and never had even a hint of a problem.
It's hard to see how you can say it's 'banned' if mere ownership of the item is perfectly OK. 'Banned' would imply that you shouldn't have the item, no matter how you got it. Refused Classification only means Aussie retailers can't put it on their shelves, because it doesn't have the little ratings sticker that it needs to have. But there is nothing stopping you downloading it, importing it etc. And once it's in your hand it's perfectly, utterly legal to play it as much as you want. The law in question here is a ~retail~ law - that you can't sell something that isn't carrying a valid ratings sticker. But the game itself is not illegal, banned, or any other similar word you might use.
It's not ~really~ spin-doctoring. There are genuine differences between this situation, and a situation of genuine government censorship. Namely, intent. The problem in Australia has arisen due to an inconsistency in the law, not through any active desire to censor or ban content. Indeed, the current government has publicly expressed their support for getting the problem fixed and introducing an R18 rating for games. And it will happen ... but legislative change takes time.
It is important to understand exactly the mechanism at work here, and how it differs from an actual ban. RC content is not banned. It is perfectly legal to own and play an RC game, or any other 'refused classification' content (except in WA and some areas of NT). There is no active desire on the part of the government to 'ban' this game or any other game. The content is not illegal - it merely doesn't fit within any of the defined rating categories and hence is unrated.
The situation is as follows:
- Media sold in Australia needs to carry a rating (generally a physical sticker). The ratings are: G, PG, M15+, MA15+, R18+, X18+. Media that doesn't have a rating cannot be sold (regardless of its content ... it could be aimed at preschoolers for what it's worth, but if it ain't got the sticker, you aren't permitted to put it on the store shelves). This is a point of difference cf. the US: US classifications are voluntary, whereas they are compulsory here. But that in itself isn't an issue provided you have a range of classifications to apply that encompass all content.
- However, the ratings system is quite old. Back when it was developed, the opinion was that 'only kids play games'. Therefore, the X18 and R18 ratings that exist for film, literature and any other type of media, were not included in the available ratings for games. This is partly an oversight, partly a lack of thought as to how this would effect things in the future (when gamers were mostly adult) and yes, partly driven by some polticians' ideologies.
- Result: games that have content that doesn't fit into MA15+ or lower must be refused classification. Again, this does not make the game ILLEGAL. It is not 'banned'. Australian stores simply can't ~sell~ it. So people that want to play the game will just have to buy from overseas/download from Steam/etc.
The Classifications Board themselves are big supporters of fixing the system so that the existing R rating can be applied to games. They'd love to be able to whack an R rating on it and let it through. But they can only work with the ratings that have been given to them to use.
This (importing it from retailers overseas) is exactly what every Aussie already does with every other RC game. It's a big reason why the lack of an R18 rating is so utterly stupid and pointless. Hell, I buy most of my games from overseas anyway because they are cheaper than buying them locally, even including shipping.
And amusingly enough, your other suggestion has happened in the past! The original Duke Nukem 3D was initially refused classification in Australia. They then released a modified version for Australia, without the blood and girls, which got through fine. They then published a small and easy to apply patch on the web that put the removed content back in, which 99.9% of people downloaded. All perfectly legal! (RC stuff itself isn't illegal to own in most Australian States - it just can't be sold on retail shelves ... so selling a modified copy and publishing a free patch on the web is fine) /facepalm
Lack of R18 rating has the following effects:
- Doesn't stop anyone playing the game, since they just import it anyway;
- Means local retailers miss out on revenue, with the gamers' dollars going to overseas retailers instead;
- Often sees games that are rated R in every other country getting squeezed in under the MA15 rating, meaning that 15-17 year olds are being exposed to R content anyway (negating the effect of the law in the first place!);
- Irritates the classification board no end: they know perfectly well how retarded the system is and themselves are big proponents of introducing an R rating for games ... but in the meantime they can only work with the ratings that exist; and
- Is generally just a stupid, needlessly inconsistent law (considering that movies, books and other media can be given R18 or X18 ratings ... games are the only things treated differently)
BTW, for console games (which the new MK is) you generally have to import from an NZ or European retailer due to the region coding on the discs and the PAL/NTSC issue. For PC games, US retailers are usually the way to go (cheapest).
The Australian Reserve Bank is pretty good actually. Keep in mind Australia was the only OECD country not to go into recession during the global financial crisis. A big part of that admittedly was the fact that we didn't lend money to people that couldn't possibly repay it, and the Govt. was running a modest surplus rather than the massive deficit present in many other countries. However, the Reserve Bank also has a part to play in managing the economy and has, on balance, done a pretty good job of it over the last decade or two.
That ~would~ be me. Can't standing having 'mess' around, even if it's virtual. The 'full bin' icon would bug me and I'd probably empty it straight away after deleting a file. ...that is if I used it in the first place. I always shift-delete so stuff never makes it into the bin in the first place. I have a decent rolling backup system if I really make an error. But I haven't needed it in a long time - I always think twice before deleting.
Thing is, Korea is a country where most content people demand is hosted domestically. ISPs can reach a much larger percentage of the demanded hosts without crossing to transit or peering networks. Australia OTOH is a very unusual beast in the world of provisioning internet: it's English-speaking, but far from where most English speaking content is hosted (North America, and to a lesser extent the UK). Something like 90% of traffic is international. Few other countries on earth have that pattern of demand (NZ and South Africa do, and they are capped worse than we are). But for places like Japan, Korea, or even the US for that matter, international traffic demand for residential ISPs is pretty low.
Given that reserving capacity on undersea cables is relatively expensive for ISPs, it is unlikely that Australia will see an end to data caps in the near term. It really is in a rather unique situation of being physically large, far from everywhere (particularly from where the content is we want is hosted), and having a low population.
That is not to excuse the situation though - I agree it'd be nice to get rid of the caps. And I think we are moving in that direction fairly quickly. We now have 1GB+ plans available (and some genuinely unlimited plans such as TPGs, although only available in certain areas). So the situation is MUCH better than it was even a year or two ago. I can easily see unlimited or multi-terabyte-cap plans becoming the norm within the next 5-10 years.
Although frankly, 95% of users won't really notice. The proportion of customers that consume more than even 100GB/month is tiny. Hell, I live on the Internet 24/7 and I only use ~30GB/month (although I do use a fair chunk of my ISPs unmetered content, so if you included that it'd be more like 50-60GB). The thing that will really change this is widespread adoption of IPTV (which I feel is going to happen) ... although ISPs that offer it now count IPTV as unmetered traffic anyway so it's a moot point...
Thing is, you're one of the VERY lucky ones. I would kill for your speeds. I live 3 km from the CBD of Canberra and the fastest speed I can obtain, via any means, is ~6Mbit (downstream). Relatives of mine in Brisbane are in a similar situation: they live in a central, relatively affluent suburb, but due to their distance from the exchange get poor speeds. 6Mbit is by no means 'terrible' - it's fine for gaming and everyday usage. But more will be needed in the very near future (and I'd love faster upload speeds than the 1 Mbit I get now ... uploading a roll of photos to Flickr takes hours!)
Virtually anywhere that doesn't have cable (i.e. everywhere other than select areas of Syd/Mel/Bris) or isn't very close to the exchange has rubbish speeds. Can't wait for faster speeds to be available. Frankly I don't care if it's the NBN or a private company or aliens from outer space that provide it, I just want it :P
An ISP can already disconnect you for any damn reason it sees fit (under their TOS). They have always been able to do this, and it has nothing to do with the this particular judgement. In fact, it makes the likelyhood of disconnection by your ISP LESS because ISPs no longer have to fear they will be held responsible for piracy and simply disconnect people 'to be safe'. It must now be investigated through a proper due process.
Plus, unlike in the US, there's typically 30+ ISPs to choose from in most given areas. You'd have to be trying pretty hard to get disconnected from them all.
Er no they don't ban movies like that, ~because an R rating exists in Australia for film~. So there is no problem.
The problem is that, for games, the highest valid rating is MA15+. So something that would be happily classified as R and released without issue, if it were a film, must be refused classification if it's a game but can't fit into the MA15+ category. Note that I say 'refused classification', rather than 'banned'. I can buy it from an importer if I want. But to be sold in an Australian retail store, it must carry a valid Australian classification.
Yeah it's a stupid inconsistency between the rating scheme for film and for games. It is in the process of being changed but is taking a while. I firmly believe we'll get an R rating for games in the next few years (in fact, we almost got one earlier this year ... but they deferred the decision to a later meeting). Just gotta grin and bear it until then.
They didn't 'ban' Mortal Kombat either. It was refused classification, meaning that Australian retailers can't ~sell~ it. Merely possessing a copy isn't an issue.
Anyway, as you rightly allude to, the problem in Australia is not that is that content is treated inconsistently. It's that games are 'missing' the R18 rating that exists for film, literature and other media. When they designed the video games rating system way back in the early 90s, they basically assumed that, since games were for kids, no rating higher than MA15+ was needed. Whereas for film, literature and other media, the ratings include an R18 rating. So films like Wolf Creek are still OK. But video games that are deemed unsuitable for 15-17 year olds must unfortunately be refused classification.
Note that the classification board itself is as irritated about this state of affairs as the public is. It's not their fault: they can only operate with the rating criteria they have been given to work with. They aren't on a moral crusade to ban things for the hell of it - they simply couldn't validly fit it into the MA15+ rating. The wheels are in motion to get a R18 classification for games happening (to bring them into line with film etc.), but like anything in politics, it takes a long time :(
In the meantime I'll just import this game like everyone else. No big deal. Usually cheaper to buy games from overseas anyway.
Typo in third paragraph: 'which sound reduce frivolous claims' should obviously read 'which SHOULD reduce...' >
The full judgement, including the majority and minority decisions, is available here: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FCAFC/2011/23.html
It's worth a read, or a skim at least. The judges were entirely reasonable in their dismissal and actually do seem to grasp the technical side of the case quite well (no doubt assisted by iiNet having some excellent technical witnesses/advisors during the trial). Overall it's a very good outcome for Australian Internet users, and confirms the very high level of consumer protection in this country compared to many other places.
The concession to the film industry that will now allow them to legitimately send infringement notices with the potential to disconnect users is OK. There is a heavy onus placed on the film industry to come up with all the evidence, show that it's relevant and pay for the ISPs time to investigate. Further, if the disconnection is later found to be unwarranted, it is the film industry that bears all responsibility and liability, not the ISP. So although there is now a prescribed path the film industry can take to disconnect people, the barriers to doing so are high, which sound reduce frivolous claims and make sure they really only go after that large-scale uploaders, not every man and his dog that occasionally downloads a film or two.
Interesting how I've seen this news on so many sites, and they all report it with overwhelmingly positive headlines ... except Slashdot. Slashdot is the only site I've seen that somehow seems to wrangle this into a NEGATIVE sounding headling. Is it just me or is /. turning into the grumpy old man that likes to complain about everything and is constantly trying to push their agenda onto other people...
While you are absolutely correct in your premise that Earth has a major problem with overfishing (some would even say, a crisis), and that we need to significantly reduce our catch, to say that we simply 'aren't supposed to eat them' is a bit rich. Humans developed tools, such as spears for fishing in rivers and shallow coastal areas, for catching fish very early on in our evolution. We've been eating them for hundreds of thousands of years, so even if we weren't meant to eat them originally, I think we can say they are a natural and acceptable food source for us now.
To take that a step further, we can't run down and kill many land-based animals with our bare hands either. We developed tools (bows and arrows, spears, boomerangs, you name it) to hunt them. Are we 'not supposed' to eat them either?
Offtopic, but that is a very interesting link you have posted, and to my eye, looks correct.
I'm a dual Australian and American citizen, so am familiar with the politics of both countries and the recent debates re health care in the US. In Australia we have universal, single-payer health care and like 99% of people here I believe that is a good thing. However, your link led me to take a look at the constitutional situation with regards to healthcare matters here. The Australian Constitution is not dissimilar to the US one - both set up a system of Federal Govt. with certain powers, with other powers remaining with the States.
Lo and behold, implementing Australia's universal healthcare system DID require a change to the Constitution:
http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/general/constitution/par5cha1.htm
That is the Australian equivalent of section 8 of the US Constitution, setting out the powers of the Federal Government. Cast your eye down it and you will see one that breaks the normal numbering scheme - between paragraph 23 and 24 you have a random paragraph 'xxiiiA' that allows them to legislate regarding healthcare. It was indeed inserted to allow UHC to be implemented in Australia in the mid-70s.
Given this, and given the large scale similarities with the US Consititution, it does indeed seem as if any such system implemented in America would require section 8 of the US Constitution to be amended. Interesting how this is an issue that has seemingly been overlooked in the debate.