Aus government confused on MMOG ratings requirements
by Tateru Nino 
Feb 20th 2009 at 4:00PM
Filed under: MMO industry, News items, Opinion, Legal
After issuing some apparently definitive statements about the requirement for MMOGs to be classified for sale in Australia, the department responsible seems to have thrown up its collective hands in confusion and is apparently unable to determine whether MMOGs should or should not be classified.
While the government held firm for a while that MMOGs were no different to other games for the purposes of the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act of 1995, and that the position upheld by the Interactive Entertainment Association of Australia (IEAA) was incorrect, that message changed earlier this week, when the message wavered and the department then suggested that publishers and retailers (and us) should seek advice elsewhere.
"One thing seems very clear," a government spokesman told us as a part of an official statement last week, "if a person is buying a computer game in a retail outlet, whether or not that game is played online makes no difference to the requirements in the State and Territory legislation that it must be classified. There is nothing in the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 that excludes online games from classification. The requirements for classification of computer games (as defined in the Commonwealth Act) before they are sold are contained in State and Territory legislation."
Certainly the State legislation for the states of New South Wales and Victoria lays out out those requirements fairly clearly.
The IEAA however, was of a different opinion. Ron Curry, head of the Interactive Entertainment Association of Australia said, "There are different classification requirements for games depending on how they are accessed by consumers. For instance, for a game sold off the shelf, where the media material is stored on a disk in the package, the classification requirements are straight forward and you will see the classification label on the box."
"However, in some instances the box sold in a retail outlet contains an access key to the game which can only be accessed online. If such a game is hosted locally it falls under the jurisdiction of the Broadcasting Services Act, but if it is hosted internationally, it's classified in the country that hosts the game, rather than in Australia."
We put that to the Classification board, who once again disagreed saying, "Section 5A of the Commonwealth Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 defines 'computer game'. As previously stated, there is nothing in that definition excluding online games from the scope of the Commonwealth Act."
"The decision on the question of whether an individual game submitted to it falls within the scope of the Classification Act is one for the Classification Board. However, the Board has confirmed that it will accept a valid application for classification of an online game (which it could not do if an online game were not a computer game as defined in the Classification Act)." (our emphasis)
Games that have been classified thusly (and by the Board's own terms must therefore be classifiable computer games under the definitions set out by the Act) include EVE Online, Ultima Online, Everquest and Vanguard (among others).
We fail to see an appreciable difference in applicable definitions between these titles, and (for example) Age of Conan, World of Warcraft, City of Heroes or The Lord of the Rings Online.
Then, on Monday, the government who has reportedly been in some discussion with the IEAA broke step with its earlier position, and stated, "This is a difficult issue, as in some cases there are questions about whether what is sold is actually a computer game, or access to a computer game."
And finally, "[D]istributors/publishers should obtain legal advice on proposed transactions relating to their particular products if they are not sure of their obligations."
When we asked for details about what those obligations actually are, the department declined to give any additional information.
Now, here's the thing. Call us crazy, but if the government departments who are themselves solely responsible for the interpretation, implementation, and enforcement of the regulations can't figure out what the obligations of commerce and the public actually are, how is seeking advice from a third-party supposed to help?
Since the only useful advice consists in essentially knowing how the government and its agencies will deal with the matter, and the government and its agencies seem to be admitting that they do not, it seems that any advice that could be proffered is going to be little more than guesswork. The government seems to be free to reinterpret its position at any time, especially as they seem to be reversing course on definitive statements already.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Jacek Antonelli said on 2:57PM 2-20-2009
Oof, what a mess. Makes me wonder how much pressure there has been from MMOG publishers on the government to decide that selling boxed MMOGs is just selling "access", not the game itself. That despite the fact that the disc in the box almost always *does* contain the game content and the program to load and display that content.
Reply
Jay said on 8:12AM 2-21-2009
Or drop bears!
Leshrac said on 4:37PM 2-20-2009
Aussie gamers crack me up; Australia contributes nothing to the world of games, or tech - yet they all think that the world owes them something. I like when my Aussie guildmates put down the US, the very same country that provides them with the game we're all playing and the hardware (DELL) to run the game. What does Australia offer the rest of the world? Nothing.
And Koalas are dirty animals.
Reply
MrGutts said on 4:57PM 2-20-2009
Australia is the world’s largest exporter of coal, wool, zinc and tin ores and concentrates, iron ore, beef, barley and raw sugar. Australia's uranium reserves are the world's largest and the worlds largest exporter of that. So the U.S. can make pretty bombs.
So the stuff your bitching about, the rare form of goods most likely came from Australia.
Oh and don't forget Foster’s lager!
Wilhelm2451 said on 5:34PM 2-20-2009
Not to be too critical MrGutts, but exporting raw materials so other people can make things isn't exactly a ringing endorsement of Australian technical acumen.
Reply
brinn said on 6:03PM 2-20-2009
on top of the commodities market, Australia is also highly active in the Finance, Construction, Medical Research, an ascendant film industry and even, to a smaller degree, Military tech industries.
it has a moderate but growing amount of international influence, widely being recognized as a regional power, a G20 member, a -possible- NATO entrant and a bridge to asia. its energy sector is a strong ace-in-the-hole for the short and long term.
it has a small but active group of first and third party game development studios, some of which are visible here - www.gdaa.com.au.
these things are just off the top of my head.
please note that it is also currently one of the best positioned countries in the world to weather the current crisis with relatively dampened flow-on effects. 4 its banks have vaulted into the world's top 15.
it's not exactly a ringing endorsement of your intellect or worldliness to spout off while not knowing any of these widely-available facts.
Reply
borgy78 said on 6:15PM 2-20-2009
if one were to watch "yes minister" they would find this whole situation extremely amusing as it is parodied very often in the series.
basically the selling the game or access arguement is a play on words to get round the whole situation. how can the gov even if the publishers are in the wrong wack them all with the fine hammer. it would be stupid and laughable. most people will be saying its just a game stop bothering yourself or something to that effect. u really think they give a shit about the games in the grand scheme of things.
game/movie rating is probably the dead-end going no-where fast dept of governemnt.
Reply
wilhelm2451 said on 6:55PM 2-20-2009
None of which changes my criticism of MrGutts' statement of Aussie superiority through commodity export.
I did not say Australia did not do anything else, I was merely pointing out that the cited examples were not ringing endorsements of said acumen.
Sorry to have gotten your hyper-defensiveness up there Brinn. I'm sure it isn't an example of any sort of inferiority complex. Keep waving the flag and singing "Waltzing Matilda."
Reply
Leshrac said on 7:24PM 2-20-2009
Aussies are just pissed because every living creature on their pathetic rock wants to kill them or is some highly venomous creature that only exists on their rock.
This is what happens when you export criminals to some island and leave them undisturbed for hundreds of years.
Reply
Amana said on 8:20PM 2-20-2009
..and this isn't our only issue. Take a gander at:
http://www.nocleanfeed.com/
Which is ultimately an irony, as the MMO classification issue is saying:
"hrm we don't know, what do you think?"
and yet the Clean Feed (censorship) issue is saying:
"we know what's best for all Australian citizens and we'll make decisions for you and your family".
Wha..?
Reply
brinn said on 8:40PM 2-20-2009
I'm actually from Berkeley, CA.
I currently live on this "rock" for a work stint, and I'd have to say that aside from perhaps Canada, some central EU countries and the West Coast, it's probably one of the nicest places anyone could hope to live, with the most amenities, the safest and cleanest streets and most secure infrastructure.
are you going to now lay down some ad hominem can of whoop-ass on my Californian ass? perhaps on our technological acumen and collective hyper-defensiveness?
this is why i so often try and avoid posting on gaming sites. the sheer weight of willful ignorance and stupidity is unbelievable.
Reply
brinn said on 8:53PM 2-20-2009
More on topic:
at the final analysis none of this matters. these finicky classification boards (OFLC and USK/FSK ?) are generally subject to partisan appointments. Every handful of years some anti-censorship heavy party gets into power and has a good old fashioned department-stacking frenzy.
on TOP of that, they're gradually losing relevance in the overwhelming face of digital distribution.
So, I would think it's safe to say that neither Australians nor Germans need worry about any of this leave-it-to-beaver garbage.
Reply
Tateru Nino said on 10:26PM 2-20-2009
The OFLC (the secretarial and administrative branch of the Classifications Board) was dismantled in 2007, and those functions absorbed into the Commonwealth Attorney-General's office.
Ain't no OFLC no more.
Sam said on 9:50PM 2-20-2009
The problem isn’t the central government itself - the problem is that the classification laws for Australia are set by the “Attourney-General” (i could have this title wrong) - there’s one from each state, and they together work out those laws. All but one of them is fine with upgrading the classification for videogames to modern status, but as long as that one general refuses - it isn’t going through. The one who refuses is a guy called Michael Atkinson, and he's essentially Australia's Jack Thompson-type character. stupidly conservative, and wielding power.
Reply
Tateru Nino said on 10:34PM 2-20-2009
Plus, there's also that the law is not being applied as it is written. Seems to me Australia doesn't actually need an R18 (or even an X18 ) category if people can wrap the content in online "access" -- and some people could say that the latest Securom versions (Spore et al) are exactly that.
That seems to give content a free ride to store shelves.