Support NeoGAF

[unrenowned]

also Rem, from what i'm reading, the whole COPPA revolves around websites with users below 13 y/o

The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, effective April 21, 2000, applies to the online collection of personal information from children under 13.

However, they never got any proof of it. And the website never allowed a -13 child to register. I'm okay with them acting due to suspicion, but they aren't directed nor pretend to provide service to -13 kids. THat's why they save the information that he agreed to use an unstransferable service that forces you to be 13 or older.

However it may be one of those laws that get a mass reaction in the US when not complied, even if your service wasn't in the scope of the COPPA. So I guess I can understand why they locked him out as soon as they spotted a vague clue.

No it clearly states that any website that has actual information they are collecting information from children must comply. A user on that website stating they're 12 years old would fall into this actual information category.

The law is there to protect children, and taking proactive measures to ensure compliance with the law is a good thing.

There are child predators everywhere, giving them a couple of days opportunity to contact any child is a couple days too long.

 

[MuddyDonut]

This thread is fun.

 

[blitzcloud]

the service is a Star Wars game. good luck trying to convince a judge that it wasn't aimed at kids under 13.

Well, I guess the ToS is pretty clear, nevermind the "yes, I am 13+ years old". But yeah, sometimes justice is er... uhhh, not very...ehh broad of vision.

Thank god I wasn't answering in that forum when someone accused me of being immature and I answered with a "I am 10< years old. blablabla". Had a moderator spotted it, I would now be totally out! Because... yeah. I guess I said it.

unrenowned. as I explained later, maybe one does not have to give 3 days or so. Maybe just wording it different, even when suspending the user, would've been enough to make it look less stupid.

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

This thread is fun.

The fact that it still exists is a miracle of the universe.

 

[Trey]

Basically, guessing a jobsworth mod saw the post and maybe never heard of the meme (I know I haven't) so they thought he was infringing so they banned him, they should have done more research into it before they did obviously.

Why?

 

[Castor Krieg]

You really think EA could prove to a judge that SWTOR is not directed at all to children? It has no appeal to children? The MMO with the bright colors, flashy lights oh and the animated characters that appear multiple times in various media that are directly targeted at children.

God forbid why would EA not want to take that risk.

It's rated "T for Teen", last time I checked that's for kids 12+, correct? Last time I checked close to 99% of stores follow ESRB rating policies. It doesn't matter if it has bright colors, you are twisting your argument whenever it suits you. At first you are "law is law", user broke the law, Bioware acted on it. Then you are moving to "MMO with bright colors" SO MAYBE THEY MYSTERIOUSLY MARKET IT TOWARD SMALL KIDS.

logichowthefuckdoesitwork.gif

Make up your goddamn mind.

Well, I guess the ToS is pretty clear, nevermind the "yes, I am 13+ years old". But yeah, sometimes justice is er... uhhh, not very...ehh broad of vision.

Actually, that is something I expect from European court. I expect U.S. court to have a very narrow view on legal matters i.e. law is law, case closed. I perfectly understand Bioware/EA not bothering with "maybe this or that" and just mechanically banning the user. But let's not pretend the action has legal merits, because it doesn't.

 

[plagiarize]

It's rated "T for Teen", last time I checked that's for kinds 12+, correct? Last time I checked close to 99% of stores follow ESRB rating policies. It doesn't matter if it has bright colors, you are twisting your argument whenever it suits you. At first you are "law is law", user broke the law, Bioware acted on it. Then you are moving to "MMO with bright colors" SO MAYBE THEY MYSTERIOUSLY MARKET IT TOWARD SMALL KIDS.

logichowthefuckdoesitwork.gif

Make up your goddamn mind.

did EA rate the game?

do any stores enforce T ratings?

 

[Castor Krieg]

did EA rate the game?

do any stores enforce T ratings?

YES, the stores actually enforce the rating, that is the reason the rating is there. It's either voluntary rating, or games would've been regulated on federal level anyway, same as all other entertainment products.

 

[plagiarize]

YES, the stores actually enforce the rating, that is the reason the rating is there. It's either voluntary rating, or games would've been regulated on federal level anyway, same as all other entertainment product.

you are wrong. sorry! they enforce M ratings but hardly any enforce T ratings. notice it's listed as an unrestricted rating. notice it says that it isn't required for 13 and unders to have parental consent to buy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entertainment_Software_Rating_Board#Unrestricted_ratings

T is equivalent to PG-13. you should probably look at a list of games rated T before suggesting that a T rated game couldn't be aimed at kids just because the ESRB gave it a T.

 

[DangerousDave]

I don't understand the permanent banning. If the mod think that the guy is 12 yo... shouldn't the ban be, as much, a 1 year ban?

 

[Emitan]

Not aimed at children. Nope. Not at all.

 

[Castor Krieg]

you are wrong. sorry! they enforce M ratings but hardly any enforce T ratings. notice it's listed as an unrestricted rating. notice it says that it isn't required for 13 and unders to have parental consent to buy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entertainment_Software_Rating_Board#Unrestricted_ratings

T is equivalent to PG-13. you should probably look at a list of games rated T before suggesting that a T rated game couldn't be aimed at kids just because the ESRB gave it a T.

The more you know...

Thanks, didn't know ratings below M are advisory-only. Seems kinda dumb.

I don't understand the permanent banning. If the mod think that the guy is 12 yo... shouldn't the ban be, as much, a 1 year ban?

I guess it has to do with user providing them with false information, which is the reason of perma ban.

 

[Dead Man]

It's rated "T for Teen", last time I checked that's for kids 12+, correct? Last time I checked close to 99% of stores follow ESRB rating policies. It doesn't matter if it has bright colors, you are twisting your argument whenever it suits you. At first you are "law is law", user broke the law, Bioware acted on it. Then you are moving to "MMO with bright colors" SO MAYBE THEY MYSTERIOUSLY MARKET IT TOWARD SMALL KIDS.

T is available for all ages to purchase. If you sell a game that is available for all ages, you need to make sure all ages can use it. That means actively complying with COPPA, not just kicking off kids under 13.

 

[echoshifting]

Some stores still don't enforce 'M' ratings, though compliance has been steadily rising for years it is far from perfect.

Either way, the fact that it is voluntary self-regulation makes me question why any of that matters.

 

[remnant]

It's rated "T for Teen", last time I checked that's for kids 12+, correct? Last time I checked close to 99% of stores follow ESRB rating policies. It doesn't matter if it has bright colors, you are twisting your argument whenever it suits you. At first you are "law is law", user broke the law, Bioware acted on it. Then you are moving to "MMO with bright colors" SO MAYBE THEY MYSTERIOUSLY MARKET IT TOWARD SMALL KIDS.

logichowthefuckdoesitwork.gif

Make up your goddamn mind.

it's not a question of marketing. It's EA convincing the judge that their product has such little appeal to a child that they decided to ignore federal law and hold user information from a user who explicitly states he is a child.

logichowthefuckdoesitwork.gif

also Rem, from what i'm reading, the whole COPPA revolves around websites with users below 13 y/o

The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, effective April 21, 2000, applies to the online collection of personal information from children under 13.

And when the user said he was 12, he fell under COPPA. It has nothing to do with the nature of the site.

 

[blitzcloud]

T is available for all ages to purchase. If you sell a game that is available for all ages, you need to make sure all ages can use it. That means actively complying with COPPA, not just kicking off kids under 13.

Uhhh, no. COPPA exclusively talks about online interactions and services. Teen is just the next rating to mature. It may allow to freely purchase, but normally the box already defines the minimum age. Anyone with a swtor copy can confirm it?

Can't wait till someone has the account name 12yearsold. Taht would be an absolute mindbreaker.

And for the last time Rem, i'm not against his banning. I'm against the way it was handled when they only had a suspicion.

 

[Emitan]

Uhhh, no. COPPA exclusively talks about online interactions and services. Teen is just the next rating to mature. It may allow to freely purchase, but normally the box already defines the minimum age. Anyone with a swtor copy can confirm it?

So a game with Mario and Pikachu on the front isn't being advertised to children?

 

[Dead Man]

Uhhh, no. COPPA exclusively talks about online interactions and services. Teen is just the next rating to mature. It may allow to freely purchase, but normally the box already defines the minimum age. Anyone with a swtor copy can confirm it?

I am referring to an ethical obligation. If you allow people to purchase an item, knowing they are unable to use it, that is fraud. If they ban kids under 13 from buying it, they would be right to boot people for being under 13. Since they don't, they need to ensure they have mechanisms for gaining parental consent, like Blizzard apparently do.

 

[blitzcloud]

I am referring to an ethical obligation. If you allow people to purchase an item, knowing they are unable to use it, that is fraud. If they ban kids under 13 from buying it, they would be right to boot people for being under 13. Since they don't, they need to ensure they have mechanisms for gaining parental consent, like Blizzard apparently do.

"TOR Accounts will not be allowed for minors under thirteen (13) years of age, regardless of permission and/or registration by such minor's parent or guardian"

From SWTOR ToS

 

[echoshifting]

"TOR Accounts will not be allowed for minors under thirteen (13) years of age, regardless of permission and/or registration by such minor's parent or guardian"

From SWTOR ToS

I think we're all pretty clear on what it says in the TOS. Does it say that on the box?

 

[blitzcloud]

I think we're all pretty clear on what it says in the TOS. Does it say that on the box?

That's what I asked. Anyone has the game and can confirm it?

 

[Dead Man]

"TOR Accounts will not be allowed for minors under thirteen (13) years of age, regardless of permission and/or registration by such minor's parent or guardian"

From SWTOR ToS

And that is the problem. They don't have to do that, they have chosen to. I too am interested to see if that is on the box, and how prominently.

Edit: It certainly is not on the front of the box as presented by Amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B001CWXAP2/?tag=neogaf0e-20

 

[blitzcloud]

And that is the problem. They don't have to do that, they have chosen to. I too am interested to see if that is on the box, and how prominently.

Edit: It certainly is not on the front of the box as presented by Amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B001CWXAP2/?tag=neogaf0e-20

Yeah well, no one expects it to be on the front part. It's always on the information back. Just like game install sizes, number of players, etc.

 

[Dead Man]

Yeah well, no one expects it to be on the front part. It's always on the information back. Just like game install sizes, number of players, etc.

I would suggest it should be on the front if it is something non technical that will prevent you playing the game. That aside, I also can't see it on the product description Amazon has.

 

[Darklord]

That's what I asked. Anyone has the game and can confirm it?

It's on the box.

 

[Emitan]

TOR has blood and gore?

 

[Dead Man]

It is on there, but that is far from ideal.

Edit: And it still does not address the fact that other companies manage to have procedures in place to allow those under 13 to play.

 

[MrCompletely]

This is EA abusing their power, the real reason that line is the ToS is so EA is not liable for pedophiles seeking out children through the game.

 

[Vamphuntr]

This is EA abusing their power, the real reason that line is the ToS is so EA is not liable for pedophiles seeking out children through the game.

They should have copied Nintendo's friends code system. Much more effective.

 

[echoshifting]

It says you have to be 13+ to register, but it doesn't seem to say you have to be 13+ to play. Given the norms of the genre there is a pretty big divide between the two in my mind.

 

[Emitan]

It says you have to be 13+ to register, but it doesn't seem to say you have to be 13+ to play.

You need to register to play.

Given the norms of the genre there is a pretty big divide between the two in my mind.

I don't understand what that means.

 

[blitzcloud]

It says you have to be 13+ to register, but it doesn't seem to say you have to be 13+ to play. Given the norms of the genre there is a pretty big divide between the two in my mind.

You can't play without an account. And accounts are non-transferable.

 

[bloodydrake]

It says you have to be 13+ to register, but it doesn't seem to say you have to be 13+ to play. Given the norms of the genre there is a pretty big divide between the two in my mind.

ya i was just thinking the same thing..just like needing a credit card..doesn't mean its your credit card..a parent can certainly pay for kids to play MMO's

 

[echoshifting]

I don't understand what that means.

You need to be 13 to register WoW but you do not need to be 13 to play it.

 

[Darklord]

It says you have to be 13+ to register, but it doesn't seem to say you have to be 13+ to play. Given the norms of the genre there is a pretty big divide between the two in my mind.

yes it does. It says it requires an account registration and that you must be 13+ to do that.

 

[Emitan]

You need to be 13 to register WoW but you do not need to be 13 to play it.

Ah, okay. So what you're saying is a parent registering an account for an 8 year old is okay? Got it.

 

[echoshifting]

Ah, okay. So what you're saying is a parent registering an account for an 8 year old is okay? Got it.

That's not what I said, and FWIW, this is the kind of response that brings these threads down. Ad hominem sarcastic gunk.

 

[Emitan]

That's not what I said, and FWIW, this is the kind of response that brings these threads down.

Huh? I thought you were saying there was a difference because the person who registers the account has their info collected and not the person who's playing, so it's okay for someone over the age of 13 to make an account and someone under that age plays it because no info is being collected on them.

 

[jim-jam bongs]

Huh? I thought you were saying there was a difference because the person who registers the account has their info collected and not the person who's playing, so it's okay for someone over the age of 13 to make an account and someone under that age plays it because no info is being collected on them.

Nah, if a parent or guardian registers a 13yo then it can be seen as them giving consent to have their child's details collected. The reason you can't just sign up 13yo kids willy-nilly is consent, if the parent does it they are giving consent.

 

[echoshifting]

Huh? I thought you were saying there was a difference because the person who registers the account has their info collected and not the person who's playing, so it's okay for someone over the age of 13 to make an account and someone under that age plays it because no info is being collected on them.

Here is Blizzard's ToU:

You may not share your Account or password with anyone, except that if you are a parent or guardian, you may permit one (1) minor child to use the Account instead of you (in which case you may not use that Account at the same time). (Section 1A of the ToU)

That is just one example. WoW is not the only MMO with a system in place to allow minors to play.

Certainly there is no reason EA has to abide by the norms of the genre or even the industry, my assertion however, based on that itty bitty little note on the back of the box, is that the disclaimer does not clearly state that you must be 13 years of age or older to play; that anyone with experience in the genre would probably expect that if they can register the account, their minor child will still be able to play. I don't believe that disclaimer is anywhere near as clear as some here are characterizing it to be.

 

[Dead Man]

That's not what I said, and FWIW, this is the kind of response that brings these threads down. Ad hominem sarcastic gunk.

I think he was just paraphrasing to make sure he understood.

Nah, if a parent or guardian registers a 13yo then it can be seen as them giving consent to have their child's details collected. The reason you can't just sign up 13yo kids willy-nilly is consent, if the parent does it they are giving consent.

Thank you. It is not that you can't register people under 13, you just need to ensure you have parental consent.

EA have chosen not to do that. So they are legally covered, but ethically they are still a shit sandswich as far as I am concerned.

 

[Emitan]

You may not share your Account or password with anyone, except that if you are a parent or guardian, you may permit one (1) minor child to use the Account instead of you (in which case you may not use that Account at the same time). (Section 1A of the ToU)

That's what I was trying to say but I horribly butchered it.

 

[echoshifting]

That's what I was trying to say but I horribly butchered it.

Fair enough, my mistake.

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

I just realized that someone gave me a tag linking to this thread.

I'm not sure if that's lulzy or facepalmy.

 

[jim-jam bongs]

Hey I've been here making a fool of myself for years and I never got a tag, consider yourself lucky.

 

[ClovingWestbrook]

I just realized that someone gave me a tag linking to this thread.

I'm not sure if that's lulzy or facepalmy.

The fact that you believe its wrong to download games you've legally purchased in response to being locked out of said games which depending on where you reside is illegal is reason enough for your tag. Especially when every mod I can remember here on GAF has argued against what you're stating.

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

The fact that you believe its wrong to download games you've legally purchased in response to being locked out of said games which depending on where you reside is illegal is reason enough for your tag. Especially when every mod I can remember here on GAF has argued against what you're stating.

I love that you're still gunning for me. It fills my belly with trolling joy.

 

[Dead Man]

I just realized that someone gave me a tag linking to this thread.

I'm not sure if that's lulzy or facepalmy.

It's a little of both, and neither of them are particularly flattering.

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

It's a little of both, and neither of them are particularly flattering.

I wear it as a badge of honor.

 

[ClovingWestbrook]

I love that you're still gunning for me. It fills my belly with trolling joy.

Gunning for your horrible stance on the matter, yes. It's quite a pathetic stance at that. Keep sucking at the teet of the corporations.