New Zealand: Illegal for Parents to Buy GTA IV for Kids

May 5, 2008 -
It is the nature of the U.S. video game market that parents make the final decision about what constitutes appropriate content for their child.

Not so in New Zealand, where the government's chief censor has ruled that parents may not purchase Grand Theft Auto IV for their children.

As reported by the New Zealand Herald, Bill Hastings (left) of New Zealand's Office of Film and Literature Classification issued an opinion that store clerks may not sell the game to parents who are buying it for their teen. Said Hastings:
If it's perfectly obvious the parent is buying the game for the child, don't sell it to the parent. If a game is R18 it's R18 for a reason and it's illegal to make it available to anyone under that age.

In New Zealand, adults buying the game for a minor - even for their own child - could be jailed for 90 days or made to pay a $10,000 fine. The Herald notes, however, that the law has never been enforced.

And while Hastings seems to take his censorship duties seriously, he had some quite reasonable comments about GTA IV's more redeeming qualities:
With the games we ban you have to kill everyone you meet and you're generally rewarded for making the killing more gruesome. In Grand Theft Auto, you don't have to kill everybody you meet - you could drive around and just look at the architecture...

All games in the Grand Theft Auto series have a kind of black satire - an overstatement of machismo. It takes the piss out of Soprano-type things.

By the way, we've heard America's self-appointed censor, Jack Thompson, claiming that the sex scenes were taken out of the Australia/New Zealand version of GTA IV. Not entirely so, according to the Herald:
In the version submitted for classification [in New Zealand], the sex scenes include going to a strip club and getting lap dances. There's also another point where the player can have sex with a prostitute - but in the version sold here, there is no visual depiction, just audio.

Thompson is trying to claim that the game is pornography, making its sale to 17-year-olds (as permitted by its M rating) a crime. If so, it would likely be the world's first-ever sans genitalia porn.

Comments

"It is the nature of the U.S. video game market that parents make the final decision about what constitutes appropriate content for their child."

Shhhh!!!

Don't let You-Know-Who hear that! He'll demand an amendment to the constitution that only HE should make that decision for other peoples' children. Like in his Bully lawsuit where he states that HE should be the one to make the decision as to what is or is not appropriate for other peoples' kids.

Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
Nightwng2000 NW2K Software http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

i think they should make those neon watches illegal...

Never enforced? Sounds about right. I live in NZ and have been playing R18 games for ages. In 1999, I got Doom 2 for my 13th birthday, which is R18. Not exactly the most violent game by today's standards, but nobody got arrested for me getting it.

Just in case people want to know, New Zealand has a sort of 2 tier rating system:

Tier 1: Entertainment anybody can have. These are rated G, PG and M. G is similar to America's E and M is kind of like America's T (teen).

Tier 2: Entertainment restricted to a certain age. Not too sure how X and NC-17 and all that work in the USA, but in NZ, the rating we use R, but (these days) it is always accompanied by a number. The 2 most common are R16 and R18. Nobody is allowed a title rated these unless they are at least 16 or 18, respectively. Less common, but still used are R13 and R15. Not too sure how a 15 year old and a 16 year differ much, but that's the NZ rating system for ya.

So, games in tier 1 can be bought for or even bought by anybody of any age. A child can buy an M game, although M is usually not very bad. Examples are Burnout Revenge, Ninety-Nine Nights and Oblivion.

Tier 2 games are restricted to the specified age or above and it is illegal to provide, in any way, such material to somebody under that age.

Despite the fact it can get you a reasonably severe punishment for even supplying a 17 year old with an R18 game, NZ censorship STILL feels the need to ban games that are overly violent games, which they suspect will make their way to the hands of underage people anyway. Examples of this are Postal 2 and Manhunt. NZ censorship also felt the need to ban an anime (Japanese cartoon) called Puni Puni Poemy that had such terrible things as "implied underage rape". (The scene was not as bad as it may sound.) Nevertheless, NZ is not protected by a Constitution allowing for freedom of expression and all that. We have something, but it's not as powerful as the US Constitution is for the US.

Here's a little something to mull over about NZ censorship: Gears of War, an extremely violent and bloody game, involving chopping humanoid creatures in half with a chainsaw in a bloody mess that splashes the screen with blood, got an R16 rating. That is the same rating as all 3 Halo games. Crackdown, on the other hand, got an R18 rating. Not sure how MS pulled that off...

[...] wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptIt is the nature of the U.S. video game market that parents make the final decision about what constitutes appropriate content for their child. Not so in New Zealand, where the government’s chief censor has ruled that parents may not purchase Grand Theft Auto IV for their children. As reported by the New Zealand Herald, Bill Hastings (left) of New Zealand’s Office of Film and Literature Classification issued an opinion that store clerks may not sell the game to parents who are buying it for their teen. Said Hastings: If it’s perfectly obvious the parent is buying the game for the child, don’t sell it to the parent. If a game is R18 it’s R18 for a reason and it’s illegal to make it available to anyone under that age. [...]

That is so stupid, especially considering the number of people who said they were going to import the uncut version. Nice try though.

Frankly, I could care less about GTA4. I played Vice City, and it's enough for me, thanks. Does that blow your mind, Jack? A gamer that doesn't care, much less want to play, GTA?

Only the gub-ment knows what's best for you!

No GTA but feel free to experience the live action gore of the Lord of the Rings trilogy.

@Nightwing

Yeah, then he gets laughed out of Congress for being a Retard and sued into bankruptcy Buy Take two!

That I would actually like to see, JBT begging for change on the street.

Scratch that, I don't wish that on people i hate, let alone someone I think is a retard. he's got enough problems. Ironicly most of them are all in his head.

First ever? what happened to the Mass Effect controversy?

Well, this is certainly a development. Not sure whether positive or negative though

"If it’s perfectly obvious the parent is buying the game for the child, don’t sell it to the parent. If a game is R18 it’s R18 for a reason and it’s illegal to make it available to anyone under that age."

Anybody know how they're going to prove an actual INTENT to buy the game for the kids? Short of telepathy I mean.

...Hastings looks like Van Damme...

"Sir, who are buying this for?"
"Not.. my son?"
"Here you go, have a good day sir!"

i think it's great that theres someone out there who isn't on the GTA hate band wagon. he's not saying anything negative about the game at all, just iterating the truth of the game.

:facepalm:

@ Magic: ESPECIALLY considering its New Zealand. You would think that half the politicians there would be on that bandwagon.

There is absolutely no visual depiction of sex at all. Calling it porn is a joke, but it's not surprise that the fool saying such things is our very own Court Jester Jack Thompson. I mean, he didn't even play the game and was claiming this as you reported when he was cut off of that Talk of the Nation show admitting that he hadn't play it. The funny thing is that people went nuts over the tame sex scene in Mass Effect and GTA, as far as I've seen, hasn't even shown a bare ass. I haven't seen a bare breast or genitalia for that matter let alone full on nudity or sex. The game say "Partial Nudity" on the back of the box in the descriptions, but I'm guessing that's referring to the strippers but I haven't seen them with anything less on than a skimpy bikini.

@Untouchable It's negative. Very negative.

At first is sounds great. "Hey parents can't buy a violent game for their kids, and then bitch about it being violent, awesome."

But then you realize it still takes away from parents who think their 15 or 16 year old is mature enough for GTA. Now, to me, no matter how mature some kids are. I don't think a 7 year old should play GTA, but it's the choice of the parent buying the game for them. It shouldn't be regulated.

It would just be nice if parents really knew the content of the games they let their kids play, and judge if they really want their child playing those games. Most of the time they assume video game violence is going to be childrens cartoon style. Then they are outraged when that rated M game has guns in it.

Way to take parenting away from the parents.

Well, it's good to know that he's aware it's satire at least. That's something about the game that seems to escape some people. It's satire in the same way the movies Robocop and Starship Troopers were satire.

I'd really like to know, though, how this law could be enforced? How could someone know if an adult was buying the game for their children unless A) The kid is right there with them when they do it or B) They loudly declare their intentions at the store.

Once again JT gets his facts wrong, or deliberately twists them to further his agenda. I have the feeling he's going to have a hard time proving their actual porn in the game. Explicit language and lap-dancing by themselves do not a porn game make.

Then again, I believe he is going for a strict definition of pornogrpahy. Specifically: " the depiction of acts in a sensational manner so as to arouse a quick intense emotional reaction." So in that sense, maybe. Still, this is coming from a man who thinks the act of a simple ass-slapping constitutes S&M. :P

They can't buy them the game, even if they go to GAMETRADERS ROBINA? How wrong is that?

OK, that's the guy in charge of what people can see? That guy? Anyone who wears a watch like that with a suit should not be in charge of determining tastes. That picture kind of looks like the mental stereotype image I get of Lazlo when I listen to Integrity 2.0.

YEah if you head over to destructoid.com there is a one hour interview with JT

he classes it as porn beause porn is 'anything that elicits a sexual response' apparently. He skims over the fact that practically millions of things coul be classed as porn under such a definition. In daytime Tv if a woman winks at somebody suggestively isnt that then 'porn'?

daft.


@GP you may want to get a link up to that interview. The podcast was run by Jim Sterling, and although JT actually makes some (for once) semi-ok points, he does demonstrate what an ignorant ass he is. Oh and once again brings up the oft debunked 'military trained ppl on doom' thing.

BAM! EXACTLY. First we let Mr. Rhode Island Attorney tell us parents what we thing, next thing we know Mr. German Shiza video (his picture looks funny :-)) is making laws saying parents do not know what is best for our kids.

Next step: making the game illegal for everyone. After all, a child could steal the game from an adult.

@ NovaBlack & GP

I've heard that podcast. Yeah, he does make some semi-valid points, but then he demonstrates his own ignorance and goes too far in his zealotry. What really gets under my skin more than anything else though was the condescending tone he took to Sterling, which is the same tone he takes with just about everyone.

He also restated how he thought it would be preferable for companies like Take 2 to tell retailers how if they sell their games to minors, they will withdraw their business. I know from the way business works, that doesn't make sense, but can someone please fill me in on the specifics as to why it doesn't exactly?

Gee, now I almost feel bad for buying kids copies of GTA IV when the store clerks turned them away... almost. :-P

Whats really hilarious about this is Video Stores don't card kids for the unrated movies they Buy/Rent, which are far more explicit than any video game would be.

Good to see they're finally putting pressure on the people that should be responsible. Not the retailers. Not the creators. The parents that buy the stuff for their kids. Bravo, New Zealand.

At least they're aren't spitting being overly religious zealots over this.

@Godkarmachine
I was just thinking that,hilarious!

I'm not familiar at all with New Zealand law, but they have something akin to the First Amendment, right? And wouldn't this be contradicting that?

@Benjamin
It's a fine idea, I have to agree with you there. But these kinds of laws are very hard to enforce practically, since you can't really know for sure who is going to play a game someone buys, short of stalking them. (Which, I'm pretty sure, is illegal even down there in Bat Country.)

As a final note, no country should need laws to tell them what is obvious.

I like how the censorship people are quite happy to say words like "piss" in their comments.

/b

I find it ridiculous and against a parents right to raise their child as they see fit. What's wrong with allowing a parent to let their 14+ aged high school teenage son or daughter play the game. Personally I'm against all government enforced age based rating systems for entertainment/free speech media but this is preposterous.

"the government’s chief censor"

Think History has proven this type of device to control people is far more damaging to society than people playing "good and bad guy" games.

That scares me far more than a kid playing GTA

Oh, yeah, nobody will find a way around this. That's for sure.
(Am I being sarcastic enough?)

So if an adult walks into a game store over there, and tries to purchase GTA IV they can be denied by the clerks because they think the adult is buying it for a kid? There is a very easy way around this, don't show up with your kids and buy the game, if no kids are in sight how can anyone prove you are buying the game for a kid?

This is a dream for censors over here, who would love to fine and jail anyone who would dare make a parental decision for themselves and allow their kid to play GTA. This hopefully will be met with outrage, it is up to a parent to decide if they want to buy GTA IV and let little Jimmy play it. It is not the job of the government to make that decision for the parent.

Well, New Zealand seems to be being entirely reasonable on this issue. For once, someone in government actually knows what he is talking about when it comes to videogames. Also, it's good to know that I won't be missing much if I buy GTAIV here in Oz.

I'd like to see th psychic clerk who denies a sale to an adult based on the gut feeling of "They is buyin' it for child!"

Scary govt censorship tho.. the mere implication of enforcement is impossible without treading over the rest of their human rights.

I'd love to see the form for buying this on the internet:

Are you over 18? Yes/No
Are you buying this game for a minor? Yes/No
You wouldn't lie about something like that, would you? Yes/No/Maybe

Maybe it's only me, but I just cannot take seriously any man that wears a NEON GREEN WATCH like that. . .

Oh, and JT is a twit.

You know if violent games don't normal people vioilent then why all the fuss to keep them away from kids?

Seriously man,

I think a guy who looks likes he sleeps with his bong and has a watch from the mid-80s should have more things to worry about..

"If so, it would likely be the world’s first-ever sans genitalia porn."

Actually, that's not entirely true. From what I understand, hentai, due to some weird quirk involving old Japanese censorship standards, is very limited in how it can actually depict genitalia... despite being VERY "free" in most other ways.

Isn't that called "censorship"?

For everyone who brings up the whole "Military training people on Doom" thing I hate to say it but, that's true. There was an article over a decade ago about how the military had modded Doom. Even had pictures of their "LAN room." They took the health down to one point and added -nomonsters in their DWANGO batch file. (oh god I just dated myself.) So actually and unfortunately yes, they did use Doom for awhile.

@Eville1

While I'm not aware of the specifics of Doom, but the main issue isn't whether the military uses video games or video game style simulations as part of their training. It's the claim that they use them to desensitize recruits. When in fact the military uses them to help teach team tactics and cooperation and the like.

@beemoh
I like how the censorship people are quite happy to say words like “piss” in their comments.

maybe they realized that the King James version of the Holy Bible has the word "piss" in it.

岩「…I can see why Hasselbeck's worried about fake guns killing fake people. afterall, she's a fake journalist on a fake news channel」

@Kincyr

It also has the word "ass" but that's a different story.

@Gameclucks

Cute. You win the Internet.

Is it just me, or does it look like the guy in the picture just got back from a rave?

This is retarded... not only in the government enforcing thier method of parenting (non of thier business imo) but also... If a parent is going to buy it for thier kid all they have to say is that its for them. If they get questioned "I bought it for myself and its for my system, I let my kid play when Im not on it." noobs.

@Mad_Scientist;

Bingo. Team tactics. Video simulation and immersion does wonders for that.
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Did Microsoft pay too much ($2.5 billion) for Minecraft developer Mojang?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Andrew EisenWell this is unique! A musical critique of the Factual Feminist's "Are Video Games Sexist?" video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-K4s7cV4Us409/20/2014 - 2:41am
Andrew EisenSome locked threads. Some let them be. So, no, I'm not seeing a problem here. No corruption. No collusion. No ethical problem with privately discussing ethics.09/20/2014 - 12:48am
Andrew EisenAnd still, in the end, Tito made up his own mind on how to handle his site. All 150 or so members went off to handle their own sites in their own ways. Some talked about it. Some didn't. Some changed disclosure policies. Some didn't.09/20/2014 - 12:40am
Andrew EisenThere were two comments other than Kochera and Tito's. One pointed out the Escapist Code of Conduct, another comment was in support of Tito.09/20/2014 - 12:40am
Andrew EisenKochera privately expressed his disagreement on how Tito decided to do something. No, I don't consider that crossing a line nor do I consider the exchange an example of the group pressuring him.09/20/2014 - 12:36am
Kronotechnical reasons. Anyways, I need to get to sleep as well.09/20/2014 - 12:29am
KronoAnd he wasn't the only one pushing Tito to censor the thread. If Tito had bowed to peer pressure, we likely wouldn't have gotten this http://goo.gl/vKiYtR which grew out of that thread. Said thread also lasted until a new one needed to be made for09/20/2014 - 12:28am
Krono@Andrew So it's an example of Kuchera crossing the line from reporter to advocate. And an example of the group pressuring for censorship.09/20/2014 - 12:21am
E. Zachary KnightAnyway, I am off to bed. I will probably wake up to all of this being knocked off the shout box.09/20/2014 - 12:20am
E. Zachary KnightKrono, that is the type of reading too much into things that bugs me. Ben did no such thing. Greg had the last word in that part of the exchange. The rest was about how to approach the story and Quinn.09/20/2014 - 12:19am
Andrew EisenSo?09/20/2014 - 12:13am
KronoExcept that the forum thread wasn't harassment, and Kuchera continued to push for the thread's removal after Tito made it clear he didn't consider it harassment.09/20/2014 - 12:12am
Andrew EisenPersonally, I see nothing wrong with someone offering their opinion or the other person making up their own mind on how to run their site.09/20/2014 - 12:06am
E. Zachary KnightKrono, I read nothing of the sort in that email chain. I read Ben giving advice on what to do when a forum thread is used to harass someone and spread falshoods about them and others.09/20/2014 - 12:05am
KronoThat's exactly what Ben Kuchera was doing to Greg Tito.09/19/2014 - 11:58pm
Krono@EZK So you see nothing wrong with one journalist pressuring a journalist from a different organization to not only not run a story, but to censor a civil discussion already taking place?09/19/2014 - 11:56pm
E. Zachary KnightI write for a number of blogs and talk to people who write similar blogs all the time for tips and advice. I see nothing wrong with that.09/19/2014 - 11:50pm
E. Zachary KnightI read that comment now and frankly, I think that guy is reading too much into this. The press talk to each other. It happens. There is nothing that can be done to stop it from happening.09/19/2014 - 11:49pm
KronoUnfortunately it seems unlikely to be resolved anytime soon.09/19/2014 - 11:45pm
Krono@EZK No that's not the comment. As for wanting nothing do with any of it, that's perfectly understandable.09/19/2014 - 11:44pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician