deanb Posted May 22, 2012 Report Share Posted May 22, 2012 Might as well have a thread for the random legal battles that happen now n then. http://gamasutra.com/view/news/170718/Silicon_Knights_only_entitled_to_1_in_damages_in_suit_against_Epic_Games.php Turns out the Silicon Knights Vs Epic Games case is still ongoing. And the judge has declared the most damages Silicon Knights can get is.....$1. Which is pretty for Silicon Knights. Also that dude really looks like he's right out of Lawnmower Man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Jack Posted May 22, 2012 Report Share Posted May 22, 2012 (edited) Oh wait, so it's....oh, it's about...okay. Edited May 22, 2012 by Mister Jack 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercurial Posted May 22, 2012 Report Share Posted May 22, 2012 That didn't take long... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted May 31, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 31, 2012 http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2012/05/epic-awarded-nearly-4-5-million-in-silicon-knights-lawsuit/ Epic got $4.45million in counter claims. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted June 18, 2012 Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 http://www.joystiq.com/2012/06/18/australia-finally-passes-r18-rating-for-games/ w00t! Now our Aussie brethren will no longer be shackled with inferior versions and lack of releases. They'll still have to pay twice as much though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MasterDex Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 (edited) Let's not jump to conclusions just yet. It could turn out that most 15+ rated games get bumped to 18+ while many of the banned titles remain banned. The following is from the RPS article on the subject: The draft guidelines call for permission for sale to be given to games that include strong realistic violence as long as it isn’t “frequent” or “unduly repetitive”, and for the implication of sexual violence to be permitted “if non-interactive and if justified by context”. Edited June 19, 2012 by MasterDex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 Pretty similar to UK rules, somewhat unsurprisingly. In the UK the obscene publications act prohibits stuff like that. You're never going to get a rape-game cleared in the UK. Can't honestly say that I think that is a bad thing. I'll be interested to see how the Aussies go about implementing this rule though. I'm not sure when repetition becomes undue. Shooting people is pretty strong and realistic and repetitive as hell. We'll see how Dead Space 3 and others fare I suppose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MasterDex Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 I'll be interested to see how the Aussies go about implementing this rule though. I'm not sure when repetition becomes undue. Shooting people is pretty strong and realistic and repetitive as hell. See, that's what I'm thinking. Even though the guidelines are pretty similar to BBFC guidelines, it all boils down to the implementation. Considering the history that Australia has as far as game ratings and censorship, I don't feel very optimistic for Aussie gamers. Let's hope the people on the classification board have some sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 You crazy foreigners with your government bans of media. It boggles my mind. The only kind of media I can think of that's banned here is CP, and that's just to protect the victims involved in making it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 I know it's a bit "First they came..." but it honestly doesn't bother me. I don't consider it an erosion of my rights that "the government" doesn't let me see or play content which some bloke at the BBFC has deemed obscene. Largely because there is nothing to prevent me from importing such material. I find American's militant defence of FREEDOM!!! mind boggling. Like the much cited (by me) protest ride in New York where, in defiance of (very sensible) laws requiring all motorcyclists to wear a crash helmet, a bunch of motorcyclists rode without helmets through NY. That is, until one of their number went over his handlebars and died as a result of splitting his unprotected head open on the tarmac. At least he died free I guess... Is it just CP or simulated CP by the way? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 (edited) That's kind of a hard question to answer, honestly. In theory it's just actual CP, but there have been instances of overzealous law enforcement agencies prosecuting people for drawings (like hentai stuff) on the theory that they could have used living child models to create the images. If the courts do their jobs right those should never get convictions unless they can actually prove that that is what really happened. As far as real people are concerned as long as the actor/actress is over 18 then you're golden, regardless of how young the character is. *Edit* - And as far as people getting crazy about "freedom" I'm inclined to agree, but with freedom of expression specifically it's protected in amendment number 1 of the constitution. There's no constitutional provision protecting your right to not wear a helmet. *Edit 2* - Largely because there is nothing to prevent me from importing such material. So it's not actually illegal to sell/possess it? In what sense is that kind of stuff banned then? Edited June 19, 2012 by TheMightyEthan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted June 19, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 You can't sell it iirc. The stores get fined (well the employees) for like £20K or something like that. I'm with Thursday, the list of banned material is pretty slim and I think one banned game never ended up being made anyway. It's why a lot of the Schwarzenegger versus ESA stuff seemed a bit silly over reaction from some folks with the doomsaying of "no one will make the games cos Wal-mart will never stock games higher than a U rating". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 What does the "U" stand for? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 I was wondering that too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted June 19, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 Oh. Universal. Fine for anyone. Lowest rating there is. Unsure on ESRB equivalent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 (edited) E, for "Everyone". They do have a decent argument though. Walmart won't carry AO (Adults Only) games, the highest they'll carry is M (Mature, 17+). And here is a list of all the AO games ever made: http://en.wikipedia....-rated_products Not many. *Edit* - AO is the only ESRB rating above M. Edited June 19, 2012 by TheMightyEthan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted June 20, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 20, 2012 Not really. If Wal-Mart don't do AO then that's likely all it'll remain at. Board members will likely be a bit pissed if Wal-mart decides to drop M-rated games which are some of the biggest selling games out there. Whereas banning stuff like Indigo Prophecy ain't exactly that much of a dent in sales. Nor do I think Wal-mart are as big a market for games that even should they stop stocking M-rated titles that developers would stop making them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted June 20, 2012 Report Share Posted June 20, 2012 So it's not actually illegal to sell/possess it? In what sense is that kind of stuff banned then? It's not illegal to possess it. It's illegal to publish it. Publish in this instance means sell, give, lend or otherwise distribute either physically or digitally. So there's nothing to stop you importing and owning obscene publications. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted June 20, 2012 Report Share Posted June 20, 2012 Not really. If Wal-Mart don't do AO then that's likely all it'll remain at. Board members will likely be a bit pissed if Wal-mart decides to drop M-rated games which are some of the biggest selling games out there. Whereas banning stuff like Indigo Prophecy ain't exactly that much of a dent in sales. Nor do I think Wal-mart are as big a market for games that even should they stop stocking M-rated titles that developers would stop making them. I don't understand your point. AFAIK no one's ever said Walmart is going to stop stocking M games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted June 20, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 20, 2012 During the Schwarzenegger versus ESA case. I mentioned up top. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted June 20, 2012 Report Share Posted June 20, 2012 Okay, well that's patently ridiculous, Walmart is not going to stop selling Call of Duty and Halo. The real issue with the California law (and other video game regulation laws) is that video games are entitled to the same protection as any other expressive medium. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted August 17, 2012 Report Share Posted August 17, 2012 http://www.joystiq.com/2012/08/16/rebellion-sues-stardock-for-its-use-of-the-word-rebellion/ I have an idea for game developers: how about instead of these ridiculous lawsuits you spend your time, money and effort actually making games? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldorf and Statler Posted August 17, 2012 Report Share Posted August 17, 2012 That would mean putting on more effort than our current iOS and Android game makers would require. Plus they're learning from the best [Apple] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Jack Posted August 17, 2012 Report Share Posted August 17, 2012 There oughta be a legal requirement to walk through hot coals or something before you're allowed to file these kinds of lawsuits. They're just far too easy to abuse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MasterDex Posted August 17, 2012 Report Share Posted August 17, 2012 Oh FFS! Really?! "Hey gamers! I know we made a pretty mediocre game that ruined the nostalgia factor of a great game so we're going to change. To do that, we need money. So we're ripping off the developers of a great game." This is not the way to do business and it's going to bite them in the ass the next time they come out with a game - which I hope gets slammed with patent suits for every word in the title. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.