Is that even legal? It would seem like the store is enforcing an non universal policy for a universal product. That cant be right, something just doesnt smell right with that.
You have to keep in mind that its not really a regulation policy, but an informative one. They can't say No! it is illegal for your son to play this game! But they can inform the parents of what is in the game and let them decide.
Completely constitutional that way, even if devious.
I really see this as a 'make money' idea for them rather than being hypocritical. As buisnessmen surely they understand that the ratings are only informative, and not legally enforceable (unless you count being grounded by parents?), and thus is a great source of recognition and thus income.
This means that they get the praise and appreciation from others from 'informing' the public about a games contents, rather than the 'enforcing' image they give off. Through all of that any fool would still remember that the parents have the last say in it.
...put a huge amount of blame from the Columbine incidents and the similar events upon video games and movies?
Sure, the rating system works fine. But only in a the same sense that people can tell you what PG-13 means, or R for that matter. We know and understand the rating systems, that's not the problem. What the problem seems to be is the individual enforcement of this in singular households.
Are they just giving themselves a pat on the back for creating a measurement system, or trying to avert the primary view that they still do not have actual 'control' over content viewing?
Slashdot Mirror
Is that even legal? It would seem like the store is enforcing an non universal policy for a universal product. That cant be right, something just doesnt smell right with that.
You have to keep in mind that its not really a regulation policy, but an informative one. They can't say No! it is illegal for your son to play this game! But they can inform the parents of what is in the game and let them decide. Completely constitutional that way, even if devious.
I really see this as a 'make money' idea for them rather than being hypocritical. As buisnessmen surely they understand that the ratings are only informative, and not legally enforceable (unless you count being grounded by parents?), and thus is a great source of recognition and thus income. This means that they get the praise and appreciation from others from 'informing' the public about a games contents, rather than the 'enforcing' image they give off. Through all of that any fool would still remember that the parents have the last say in it.
sig test, pay no attention.
Sure, the rating system works fine. But only in a the same sense that people can tell you what PG-13 means, or R for that matter. We know and understand the rating systems, that's not the problem. What the problem seems to be is the individual enforcement of this in singular households.
Are they just giving themselves a pat on the back for creating a measurement system, or trying to avert the primary view that they still do not have actual 'control' over content viewing?