How Australia’s Proposed Internet Censorship Will (And Won’t) Affect Video Games

While the lack of an adults-only rating for video games hogs all the headlines when it comes to gaming and Australia, there’s a far more sinister threat lurking on the horizon: internet censorship. But how does this affect gaming?

Proposals currently working their way through the system (it’s important to note these aren’t law yet, and may well be shot down before becoming so) would require that all internet service providers in Australia sign up to the federal government’s filtering program, which would compile a list of banned content and block that content from appearing on a user’s computer.

The filter would not just include the really nasty stuff, like child porn and terrorist activity, but expand to include anything that was “refused classification” under the nation’s content ratings laws. While this would mostly concern things like films (stuff like snuff flicks… pornography rated “X” is OK, as it’s been rated) or comics (like some of Japan’s more…extreme offerings), because of the country’s classification laws, it would also expand to cover gaming material.

This means that if a game is refused classification (RC) in Australia – like, say, NFL Blitz, or Getting Up – content related to these games would be added to the ISP filter. Throwing up a range of questions, foremost of those being, what happens when an otherwise harmless website – like, say, this one – hosts material from those games (screenshots, trailers, etc) that is totally fine in the US or Japan or Europe, but that has been refused classification in Australia?

The “good” news is, not much. The Australian Department of Broadband Communication has told Kotaku that when RC content is flagged and added to the filter – and remember, it has to be reported in a complaint first to be flagged, the government won’t be actively on the look-out for stuff – it won’t block the entire website. Only the URL of an actual image or video clip would be filtered.

Things are even less stringent when it comes to online games. Because the wheels are in motion to address the nation’s lack of an adults-only rating in Australia, the “government’s approach to filtering online games will be developed drawing on this consultation process”. In other words, it’s a wait and see approach, the results of the discussion papers (or even a clear indication gleaned from them of the public’s wishes) into expanding Australia’s game ratings to determine whether things like massively-multiplayer online titles or online shooters deemed RC are included in the filter or not.

Until this time, games will be entirely excluded from the filter. So if an MMO title is refused classification in Australia, and you manage to import it from overseas (which is technically illegal), you’ll be good to go, as it won’t be blocked.

This is all, of course, absurd. You can’t control the internet any more than you can control the rising and setting of the sun. All the federal government is doing here is displaying how remarkably out of touch they are on contemporary issues of censorship, and how ignorant the federal minister responsible for the filter proposal – Stephen Conroy – is in regards to how easy it is to bypass such measures.

But it’s not all bad news. Like I said above, this isn’t yet law. It’s a proposal, one that’s been dragging on for a few years now and has been constantly beset by issues, from findings that the filter doesn’t work (some harmless sites are blocked, while targeted ones get through) to the fact it can’t monitor peer-to-peer networks (so, BitTorrent) to a large body of dissent amongst Australia’s internet service providers.

Because of all this, I can’t personally see it becoming law. It’s just got too many hurdles to clear, both politically and technically.

But just in case it does, that’s all you need to know about how it will affect gaming, and the coverage of games. And hey, even if it does pass into law, remember; a change in Australia’s ratings guidelines would make it irrelevant, as stuff rated R18+ would no longer be “refused classification”, and as such wouldn’t be filtered in the first place.

Discuss

(63 Comments)
Go to : 1 2
  • [–]

    Rob

    Wednesday, February 24, 2010 at 2:58 PM

    So they claim they’re only block the parts of the website that contain the “illegal” material.

    Tell that to the QLD dentist who had his entire website blocked because some pages on his site had been taken over by the Russian Mafia!

    Then to make things even more interesting – it’s a secret blacklist. You won’t know what’s blocked and what isn’t.

  • [–]

    B

    Wednesday, February 24, 2010 at 3:14 PM

    “what happens when an otherwise harmless website – like, say, this one – hosts material from those [RC] games … The “good” news is, not much… Only the URL of an actual image or video clip would be filtered.”

    This is blatantly not true; if an Australian site hosts material that is RC (or even links to it), the ISP can be fined $11k per day until the content (or link) is removed. This is in addition to the urls being added to the filter.

  • [–]

    Braaains

    Wednesday, February 24, 2010 at 6:48 PM

    On the issue of RC… is it only considered “RC” after it’s actually been submitted and knocked back? I.e. if it never gets put forward for classification (because they’re not planning on releasing it in Australia anyway) is it considered RC?

    I’m thinking in terms of something like RapeLay. If it was put forward for classification it’d certainly get RC. But if it hasn’t been submitted, and hasn’t been refused classification, does that mean it wouldn’t get stopped by the filter?

    • [–]

      alinos

      Wednesday, February 24, 2010 at 8:58 PM

      im gonna guess Rapelay is on the restricted content list already

  • [–]

    alinos

    Wednesday, February 24, 2010 at 8:57 PM

    The “good” news is, not much. The Australian Department of Broadband Communication has told Kotaku that when RC content is flagged and added to the filter – and remember, it has to be reported in a complaint first to be flagged, the government won’t be actively on the look-out for stuff – it won’t block the entire website. Only the URL of an actual image or video clip would be filtered.

    that goes against what conroy said on hungry beast he reckons that normal sites were blocked because organised crime hacked porn into a page so the whole site was blocked :(

  • [–]

    ridcrime

    Thursday, February 25, 2010 at 2:09 AM

    “Playing a video game is one of the most peaceful things I do” Mate, surely you can’t be serious?

    2002: A Massachusetts man commits suicide after an apparent addiction to the computer game EverQuest.

    2002: A 24-year-old South Korean man dies after an 86-hour gaming session.

    2003: An Alabama man who killed a policeman blames his addiction to Grand Theft Auto for the crime. A jury later dismisses the excuse and finds him guilty.

    2004: A Shanghai man stabs his friend for selling a cyber sword they jointly won in a computer game.

    2005: A South Korean man dies after 50 hours of non-stop computer gaming.

    2005: Taiwan police follow an armed fugitive to his hideout by tracking down the computer on which he had been playing online games.

    2005: A Scottish couple are sentenced to jail after neglecting their children because they spent too much time on internet games.

    2006: A 13-year-old Chinese boy jumps to his death after playing online games for 36 hours straight.

    2006: An English bus driver is sacked for playing games on his handheld device while driving.

    Oh but all these people did the same thing you did after work for years before they finally decided to do the ultimate De-Stress DEATH! , next time learn how to spell it.

    • [–]

      Rob

      Thursday, February 25, 2010 at 9:40 AM

      Ridcrime, did you actually think through what was you wrote?

      By your reasoning, it doesn’t matter that some people find driving a car to be a relaxing experience (my wife included), people have died driving cars. Should we should ban/belittle all drivers just because some people take an activity to an extreme or just because accidents happen?

    • [–]

      Rappo

      Thursday, February 25, 2010 at 12:27 PM

      @ridcrime
      Wow.
      Do you realy believe what you’re typing, or are you just being an ass?

      You actually sighted a Jack Thompson case.

    • [–]

      Thomas

      Tuesday, March 2, 2010 at 1:24 PM

      I’m not sure what the point of these people dying after playing video games is…

      A man plays a round of golf then goes and shoots himself.

      A man has a swim then goes and kills his wife.

      A woman spends the day buying shoes then drives her car off a cliff.

      A man leaves his meditation class and walks infront of a bus.

      After driving for 15 hours straight a man stops his car on railway tracks and gets cleaned by a train.

      A man after a round of duck hunting decides to shoot himself in the head.

      Plenty of people go and kill themselves or someone else after doing any variety of things that some people find relaxing and other people find not relaxing.

      The fact that some people do this after playing video games means absolutely nothing since there probably isn’t a single thing in the world that someone hasn’t been doing before they’ve gone and killed someone.

      It also has nothing to do with wether or not the other poster finds it relaxing or not. I’m sure plenty of people (particularly americans) find it relaxing to go and shoot guns even though as many or more people wouldn’t find it relaxing in the slightest.

  • [–]

    CloneTrooper

    Friday, February 26, 2010 at 3:53 PM

    Reichsminister Conroy is too busy accepting free Ski Passes from the head of Channel 7….right before he gives the TV Stations a $250 Million handout.

    How bout everyone chips in and buys him an all expenses paid trip back to Colorado so he can go Snowboarding and Skiing again….i mean its clearly how the Labor Goverment works right? You buy/give them things and they do what you want?

  • [–]

    laptop

    Thursday, December 23, 2010 at 4:17 PM

    That is really good to know. I support the filtering of the Adult and unwanted stuff. In a way govt. is helping us in preventing ourself from doing crime.

  • [–]

    H.B. 101

    Friday, January 28, 2011 at 1:08 AM

    Does anyone understand this is a freedom of choice issue? Forget the technical issues and realize your rights are being taken away. Anyone with two brain cells working knows it won’t work.

Go to : 1 2

Join The Discussion