TheMightyEthan Posted July 2, 2013 Report Share Posted July 2, 2013 Yeah, that interpretation would seem to erase the entire exception. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. GOH! Posted July 2, 2013 Report Share Posted July 2, 2013 *Reads about the UK VRA of 1984* What a prudish law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted July 2, 2013 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2013 I'd guess a no on it being okay. Whether you're making a profit or not wouldn't have much bearing anyway given Hollywood Accounting. And either way it's still being sold. A church couldn't sell what it wanted and put their hands up and go "but we're non-profit", still have to follow the law. As far as what Thursday said I'd guess it would go that far. Self-promotion is advertising, and I don't think you can distribute the things that aren't allowed under VRA (extreme violence, peadophillia, porn, drug promotion etc) in an "advertising" capacity. btw would anyone mind if I shifted this across to own thread/somewhere else. Not really about "Games and the Law" for a while now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. GOH! Posted July 2, 2013 Report Share Posted July 2, 2013 As a legal professional and avid gamer, I'd have to say this thread has been about games and the law the entire time. The VRA is a law, isn't it? The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is a law too, right? A discussion of the political philosophy underpinning such laws, and the jurisprudence flowing from the laws, is still a discussion of games and the law. In order to understand how such laws and legal theories may affect games, we really ought to understand how such laws affect other media. Since there are a lot of USA folks here, any discussion of games and the law will necessarily involve discussion of the First Amendment and 'freedom of speech'. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted July 2, 2013 Report Share Posted July 2, 2013 (edited) I'd guess a no on it being okay. Whether you're making a profit or not wouldn't have much bearing anyway given Hollywood Accounting. And either way it's still being sold. A church couldn't sell what it wanted and put their hands up and go "but we're non-profit", still have to follow the law. Religious groups/charities often "sell" videos or whatever for a nominal fee. I'm talking about a situation where I say "I will send a copy of this to anyone who wants it, as long as you pay for the cost of postage and the actual disc/packaging itself." I'm not even talking about covering overhead, which is where stuff like Hollywood accounting comes in. *Edit* - Dean, if it were your way what is even the point about having the section allowing distribution if it's not for a business or reward? If all distribution is a business and none can ever fall into that category, why even have it in the law? That would be like writing a law that says "You can't kill people unless they're already dead, in which case it's okay." Edited July 2, 2013 by TheMightyEthan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted July 2, 2013 Report Share Posted July 2, 2013 I'm pretty sure distributing for cost would not be in the furtherance of business. Business is not being furthered. The wording "in the course or furtherance of business" comes from Tax law, and if you are non-profit then you are tax exempt. I'd say that there's a pretty good chance that it's a loophole you could jump through. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted July 2, 2013 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2013 @Goh: Well sure, but we've long gone past the relevancy of the original news. Currently it jsut seems to be dickwaving between three lawyers on US and UK laws to a non-lawyer outsider. Especially on hypotheticals of non-profits and such, because there's no charitable video game publishers. @TME: Eh, about only time I see say a church selling videos is at a carboot, in which case it's a direct sell. And then distribution of media would come from the funds there. Charging for materials I'd guess is gonna be a really weird grey zone you'd be stepping in. TN would probably know more on that, but I'd still say likely not. Just because you're not making a profit wouldn't really exempt you. As for the edit/second part. As mentioned IANAL, so I've not a clue what you're trying to say/tell me I'd do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted July 2, 2013 Report Share Posted July 2, 2013 In US statutory interpretation, at least, (I have no idea whether this is the case in the UK or not) the presumption is that every provision of the law is in the law because it means something. If it didn't mean anything it wouldn't be in the law. So the presumption is against interpreting sections of laws to have no applicability, to be meaningless. However, under your interpretation that the material cannot be distributed under any circumstances, the exception Thursday quoted has no meaning, which is a disfavored interpretation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted July 2, 2013 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2013 I haven't said anything about the material not being able to be distributed under any circumstances. That's quite obviously false. For one there's educational exceptions. And as you said yourself the exceptions quoted by Thursday on previous page. What I am saying is it would be my interpretation that an organisation, non-profit or not, wouldn't be able to get around the rules in essentially selling something even though they're not making a profit on it. I'm not really sure "furtherance of business" or "reward" is solely defined as "profit". 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted July 2, 2013 Report Share Posted July 2, 2013 Okay, yeah, looking back on your comments I must have made them more extreme in my head somehow. You were just saying you didn't think you'd be able to sell it, but somehow I read it as you saying you can't distribute it at all. I specifically picked that example because I thought it seemed like a grey area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldorf and Statler Posted July 2, 2013 Report Share Posted July 2, 2013 (edited) I want to be part of this conversation but I'm not into law and politics enough to contribute anything worthwhile. Unless one of you... HAS BETRAYEDTHELAAAAAAAAAW Edited July 2, 2013 by Waldorf And Statler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted July 3, 2013 Report Share Posted July 3, 2013 @Dean most likely not solely defined by making profit. But if you distribute at cost and say that you are trying to get a message out and that this is how you are expressing yourself then you'd be in a pretty grey area. You'd need a test case to be sure. This applies less to games as in most of Europe they are under a voluntary system. In the UK PEGI is covered by the VRA, but even there games companies have a lot of wiggle room. For example, despite approaching parity (certainly with DS games) most mobile / tablet titles are not rated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted August 2, 2013 Report Share Posted August 2, 2013 Oh for fuck's sake, Australia. They did grant SR4 classification (as MA15+), but apparently the "positive depiction of drug use" was the use of alien narcotics to obtain certain superpowers. Seriously? "OMG! Don't want to encourage adults to use Martian speed, now do we?" Apparently it was only a 20 minute mission where that happened, so they just removed it. In other news, apparently the alien anal probe weapon gets to stay. That one actually seems more objectionable to me. I just don't even know anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Heat Posted August 2, 2013 Report Share Posted August 2, 2013 It's Australia, mate. The most unpredictable sheila of'em all! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted August 2, 2013 Report Share Posted August 2, 2013 Oh for fuck's sake, Australia. They did grant SR4 classification (as MA15+), but apparently the "positive depiction of drug use" was the use of alien narcotics to obtain certain superpowers. Seriously? "OMG! Don't want to encourage adults to use Martian speed, now do we?" Apparently it was only a 20 minute mission where that happened, so they just removed it. In other news, apparently the alien anal probe weapon gets to stay. That one actually seems more objectionable to me. I just don't even know anymore. Drugs are okay but not sex? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mal Posted August 2, 2013 Report Share Posted August 2, 2013 Ye sinners, everything is wrong and sinful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFlyingGerbil Posted August 2, 2013 Report Share Posted August 2, 2013 Oh for fuck's sake, Australia. They did grant SR4 classification (as MA15+), but apparently the "positive depiction of drug use" was the use of alien narcotics to obtain certain superpowers. Seriously? "OMG! Don't want to encourage adults to use Martian speed, now do we?" Apparently it was only a 20 minute mission where that happened, so they just removed it. In other news, apparently the alien anal probe weapon gets to stay. That one actually seems more objectionable to me. I just don't even know anymore. Drugs are okay but not sex? An alien probe weapon be more rape-y than sexy though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted August 2, 2013 Report Share Posted August 2, 2013 An alien probe weapon be more rape-y than sexy though Yeah, that. To be clear, I don't think the government should be saying you can't put either one in, but between the two the anal rape seems more objectionable than voluntary drug use. 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.