Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

350 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Norway isn't a member of the EU. (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273126)

Norway isn't a member of the EU.

Re:Norway isn't a member of the EU. (-1, Troll)

DavidR1991 (1047748) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273182)

EU is the short code for EUrope in some cases (although normally it's EUR) but if you're going to be really pedantic, yeah, they're not in the EU: But they are in the European Economic Area (EEA) even though they're not a member. That's good enough

Re:Norway isn't a member of the EU. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273228)

Yeah, but don't worry that you're gay, it's fine. What, that's not what you said? Well, it doesn't matter, it's close enough.

Re:Norway isn't a member of the EU. (5, Informative)

netsharc (195805) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273248)

EUR is the code for Euro, the money not the continent...

It's not being pedantic. I live in the EU, and I've never heard of EU being "the short code for EUrope" ever. And it's not "good enough", being a member of the EU means you have to follow laws agreed by the EU, and if Norway's not in the EU, and EU has this law against looking up digital skirts, and Norway doesn't, it means it won't be illegal in Norway...

Is that pedantic enough for you, Mr. Know It All?

Re:Norway isn't a member of the EU. (2)

netsharc (195805) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273362)

And after reading the linked post, it's the 3 countries (one of which isn't even in the EU), but the title of this post makes it sound like the game is being pulled out of the entire EU.

Yeah... well done, Mr. Summary Writer. Fucking moron.

Re:Norway isn't a member of the EU. (1)

DavidR1991 (1047748) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273676)

I love the way you say you live in the EU under some kind of crappy assumption I don't. I live in Europe too, and I'm aware that EUR is also the Euro. What I was saying is that it's not unheard of for people to (wrongly) refer to Europe as EU or EUR as a form of 'country code', even though it refers to the European Union or the currency.

My mistake here is that I skimmed over where the summary said 'member state' and missed it. Clearly the summary was referring to the actual EU and not the country code. So the summary writer is a moron. My mistake.

Even if that is the case, you're still being a pedant because if you RTFA EU or not EU has squat to do with the issue - the article never mentions European Union or laws against up-skirts at all. What the articles and summary presumably meant to say is that these countries share common conservative outlook on this kind of content or something (because if it was an EU directive then all member states would presumably be effected)

Re:Norway isn't a member of the EU. (4, Informative)

mikael_j (106439) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273276)

EU = European Union. It never means Europe.

EUR = Euro, currency, not a continent.

Re:Norway isn't a member of the EU. (4, Insightful)

Carewolf (581105) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273294)

And nudity isn't considered pornographic or even indecent in Denmark. Some parent groups are starting to act weird, and child pornography is banned in Denmark, but child pornography in Denmark does not mean under US legal-consent teenagers, it means tweens or younger.

Re:Norway isn't a member of the EU. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273432)

Hell, I walk around nude all day long. That's just how we Vikings roll!

Re:Norway isn't a member of the EU. (2)

PitaBred (632671) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273630)

They're not parent groups. They're moral crusaders, out to inflict their narrow field of view (and likely shame of their own thoughts) on you.

A Simple Fix (1)

DigitaLunatiC (452925) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273128)

I don't think it would ruin the story for the developer to just bump the age by one year.

Re:A Simple Fix (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273166)

But the law in question, ie the swedish law here, does not bother about the STATED age. The only age that matters is how old they appear to be.

Re:A Simple Fix (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273194)

So, how old is this beauty?

o|--

Define "looks like" (1)

AnotherScratchMonkey (592037) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273196)

Some 30 year old women look like that. So we can define that "look" to be 30.

Re:A Simple Fix (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273210)

Which is ambiguous to say the least. How can there possibly be a criteria for something like that since no matter where you draw the line, there will be plenty across it that "shouldn't" be there. I'm sure that's the main reason why they rather not enter the market rather then make random changes that may or maynot work and get into trouble.

Re:A Simple Fix (4, Informative)

mikael_j (106439) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273252)

Actually it's not as simple as that.

If it's a real person who's over 18 but looks 12 it will still be legal.

If it's a real person who's 17 but looks 20, it will still be legal.

If it's a fictional character that is 50 but looks 12, it's illegal.

If it's a fictional character that is 18 according to the swedish version of the game but 17 according to every other version of the game then most likely it would be illegal as it would be clear that the age was changed simply to avoid the swedish legal system.

Of course, IANAL but I am swedish.

Re:A Simple Fix (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273376)

I'm not sure whether that's more or less insane than the system in the US. You end up with these bondage cartoons where the characters are consenting to whatever it is because somehow that's better than if cartoons characters weren't consenting.

Plus those characters have to be over 18, rather than not obviously children because that would be child porn even though there's no way of determining it otherwise. I mean seriously, because it's really harmful to society to be ogling characters that could theoretically be mature looking and 16 years old. I get the problem when it's real people, but with cartoon characters I have no idea how one would know the difference.

Re:A Simple Fix (1)

durrr (1316311) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273482)

What about drawing children in the bondage cartoons? Oh that's terrible!
But if I write a book about a serial-child-murderer/rapist that's okay. Why?

Re:A Simple Fix (2)

durrr (1316311) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273278)

The law in question fucked over a professional manga translator in sweden recently due to you know, tentacle porn or something.
To get the law tested some guys on the swedish anti-establishment forum of flashback(.org) planned to sue the swedish distributor for child pornography distribution once the game was out, which might've been what triggered this hesitation from nintento.

So sweden joins the club of countries where you can go to prison for being skilled with a pen.

Re:A Simple Fix (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273356)

This is the fundamental flaw with all fictional-child-porn laws. They are not based on the principle of protecting people from mistreatment, but on the principle that people should not be allowed to imagine mistreating someone. This is literally a victimless crime.

And because there is no objective defense against the charges – you cannot produce a legal ID that confirms whether or not the subject was a certain age or not – it is impossible for a citizen to be certain he's complying. I think the character looks 20; somebody else thinks she looks 15. The distinction is 100% subjective. There's a principle in US law (and other countries' too I'm sure) that states that a person must be able to determine for themselves ahead of time whether what they are about to do is legal or not. Ignorance of the law is no excuse of course, but if you (or qualified legal counsel) read the law but still can't tell from it whether what you're thinking of doing will be legal or not... that's an invalid and unenforceable – and rather obviously unjust – law.

Re:A Simple Fix (3, Insightful)

nospam007 (722110) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273444)

Let's hope the game doesn't allow them to drink, watch an R-rated movie, vote or pick up a firearm.
Also being minors, they can't be in the game for more than the allowed working hours for minors.
Perhaps somebody from Social Services should stand behind every player to be sure.

Re:A Simple Fix (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273368)

You mean, like, how some old judge perceives it?

That's a bit like our law that defines porn as "something able to excite someone". So watch out for those pedo judges that get excited by pics of your daughter, you might be in for CP possession if he gets a boner from your pics.

Re:A Simple Fix (2)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273578)

Fortunately US law does not define porn as "something able to excite someone". For one thing, it doesn't define "porn" at all. Second, the definition of "obscenity" (which might be what you're thinking of) is more complex than that. One part of the definition (known as the Miller Test) is that the material as a whole has to serve to excite someone, so the fact that the judge got a stiffy during the two-minute bedroom scene in Generic Romantic Comedy VIII doesn't cut it. Also, it has to depict the sex in a clearly offensive way. And finally, it has to have no redeeming literary/artistic/political/scientific value, which is a part of the test that even XXX-rated porn movies are able to pass.

Re:A Simple Fix (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273388)

But the law in question, ie the swedish law here, does not bother about the STATED age. The only age that matters is how old they appear to be.

Ask Julian Assange how perverse Swedish law is when you're not one of the politically-correct victim-of-white-male-aggression classes.

Re:A Simple Fix (1)

Carewolf (581105) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273304)

What difference would that make? The legal age for consent in Scandinavia is not 18. This story doesn't make any sense.

Re:A Simple Fix (3, Insightful)

canajin56 (660655) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273364)

Most countries that have an age of consent that is less than 18 still consider it child pornography if it contains somebody under 18. That is, just because it's legal to fuck somebody who is 17 doesn't mean its legal to see them naked. I don't know if that's how it works in Scandinavia, but that's how it is in Canada. You can have sex with a 17 year old, but if you get them to webcam naked you're both going away for a long time. She'll probably get the worst of it because you just are in possession of child pornography, but SHE is manufacturing AND distributing it.

Re:A Simple Fix (1)

Carewolf (581105) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273422)

Don't know the swedish law, but here it is illegal to profit from pornography of people under 18, but the it is not child-pornography. Child pornography has particular harsh laws and only apply to pornography with actual children, not teenagers or young adults.

Re:A Simple Fix (2)

pipatron (966506) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273684)

It works like that in Sweden too, and it is because of international agreements. The age of consent is 15, but you're pretty much not allowed to watch the act you're partaking in because now we have laws aginst actually watching child pornography too.

Re:A Simple Fix (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273394)

IIRC they make a difference between being allowed to fuck someone and being allowed to take an "erotic" picture of someone. Yes, we're not talking about real people here, but the law doesn't make a difference here.

Which is odd if you ask me. Laws are supposed to protect someone from harm who cannot defend themselves. And I still refuse to consider the rights of fictional people.

Re:A Simple Fix (3, Informative)

aliquis (678370) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273468)

Pornography and having sex isn't the same thing.

The retarded thing is that child-pornographic FICTION is a crime.

Who gives a shit about drawings? Murder, violence and so on in fiction form isn't crimes.

Over reaction and 100% retarded.

Re:A Simple Fix (2, Insightful)

elashish14 (1302231) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273580)

It's true - just like Muslim extremists flip a shit over drawings of Muhammed, the Western world does likewise over images of child sexuality.

We're just as bad as them.

Re:A Simple Fix (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273702)

Evidently Westerners revere children who are being fuckied like Muslims revere the prophet Muhammed (pbuh).

Re:A Simple Fix (1)

Carewolf (581105) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273602)

It might be a crime in Sweden and in Australia, who got the stupid idea in the first place, but what does that have to do with countries that are not Australia or Sweden?

A poll (1)

catmandue (1132331) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273140)

At what age do men stop looking up girls dresses? Does it really matter?

Re:A poll (5, Funny)

u17 (1730558) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273260)

Speak for yourself, I want my grave to be made of glass so I can look up girls' dresses after I die.

Re:A poll (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273382)

Given that there are sites dedicated to those types of photos, I'm guessing never, or at least there's a sufficient that never stop to make it profitable.

More like... (2)

DWMorse (1816016) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273146)

More like Dead on Arrival then?

Re:More like... (1)

Technician (215283) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273392)

Barbie and Ken had better watch out. By the way, what age is Barbie anyway?

Re:More like... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273476)

She's 52, born 9 March 1959. Total cougar. She likes it when the young guys try to look up her dress.

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Barbie

Re:More like... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273714)

Barbie and Ken had better watch out. By the way, what age is Barbie anyway?

Barbie is an old bag, she had a young sister named skipper though..... Skeletor sure had a good time with her.

Higher Sales (1)

L473ncy (987793) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273156)

This is probably going to lead to higher sales if anything. Since they can't have it they'll just buy it from elsewhere. To be honest if it's banned I'm pretty sure more of us would want to get our hands on it. It's kind of like the Streisand effect, if it's banned we want to check it out for ourselves.

OH NOES! (3, Insightful)

gilbert644 (1515625) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273158)

How can us Scandinavians be smug about American prudishness now?!

Re:OH NOES! (1)

mikael_j (106439) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273174)

This isn't about prudishness in the "ZOMG A BREAST!!1 THINK OF THE CHILDREN!! AAAAAAH!!!111one" sense.

This is about the usual child porn hysteria. Here in Sweden our politicians were chasing easy points with the public and pushed through various laws against child porn that basically made erotic drawings of someone who could be considered to be a child illegal. That is, it doesn't have to be a real person. In retrospective the only people who seem to like this law are the politicians.

Re:OH NOES! (4, Interesting)

Securityemo (1407943) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273358)

Place the blame where it should be, in the lap of Beatrice Ask [wikipedia.org] . Just read this interview [svt.se] . She's evidently in favor of thoughtcrime; literally, she says that "children and childhood mustn't be offended" when she's asked about why drawn "child pornography" should be illegal. She's also the one who came up with the crazy suggestion that people who visit prostitutes should have mails with brightly-colored envelopes sent home to them, so that they couldn't keep it a secret from their family (or anyone who saw the letter being delivered). Fortunately, this suggestion wasn't well received by anyone else AFAIK.

Re:OH NOES! (3, Interesting)

mmcuh (1088773) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273420)

People who are suspected of visiting prostitutes, even.

Re:OH NOES! (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273634)

Which is making an accusation without proof. Cute. What happened that caused her to take this kind of position.

Re:OH NOES! (2)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273478)

Since nothing stops you from buying your own brightly colored envelopes, you could have a lot of fun with that. Just mail all your bills, birthday cards, and similar in such envelopes.

Re:OH NOES! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273554)

That's a good idea. Someone should mail them to her...maybe then she'd change her views on privacy.

What the fuck is wrong with the Japanese? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273208)

Can somebody who is more familiar with Japanese culture please explain why they're so obsessed with young girls? Why do they feel the need to portray the molestation of them in video games, their poorly-drawn comics and cartoons, and even at their comic book conventions?

Basically every other modern culture has realized that there are some things that you just don't do to or with children. Why haven't the Japanese figured this out yet?

Re:What the fuck is wrong with the Japanese? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273292)

Frankly, they have it correct. It's a serious cognitive bias of some kind to not encunt a girl of the approximate age of 10.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases [wikipedia.org] No doubt it's on there somewhere.

Re:What the fuck is wrong with the Japanese? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273322)

Good to know the pedophile apologists still post on slashdot.

Re:What the fuck is wrong with the Japanese? (1)

ThePhilips (752041) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273336)

1. Asian women look younger to us westerners.
2. All men are obviously obsessed with young girls.
3. All women are obviously obsessed with looking like young girls.

Shortly: youth is the only thing which never gets out of fashion.

Regarding molestation... This actually interesting question. But it should be rephrased: why it is only that kind of stuff gets imported into the West?? Why it is nearly impossible to find a decent romance or ero manga here?? They are actually in Japan are more numerous compared to the hentai.

Re:What the fuck is wrong with the Japanese? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273704)

Well, it's probably more creepy to have the more realistic depiction of underaged girls that might come out of Western art. I haven't seen too much of anything outside of the anime style posted on 4chan, for instance, and it's apparently legal for the loli-dumpers to do so. Either that or they're not getting banned, but still getting reported to any authority who asks...

...speaking of which. [paheal.net] (actual Dead or Alive pr0n, nsfw)

Re:What the fuck is wrong with the Japanese? (5, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273418)

Now, I'm not that big into Japanese culture. But from what I gather they're not really that "obsessed" with young girls. Not any more than the Dutch are obsessed with dope. Or the average US person with guns.

We just perceive it that way because we get told a lot that these things are legal there while being illegal where we live and our sensationalist media show us that Japanese businessman who buys little girl panties, the Dutch dopehead who smokes one blunt after another in a coffeeshop and the gun-toting redneck enjoying his afternoon with a machine gun.

Re:What the fuck is wrong with the Japanese? (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273460)

Two points:
1) What you describe is a stereotype of Japanese culture, which may have a grain of truth behind it, but is based on a rather limited familiarity with that culture, and is not generally true. Japan punishes actual child sexual abuse, much like any other modern industrial country does.
2) What you do see, that gives you this impression, is an example of the unintended consequences of censorship. Japan's culture has its own flavor of prudery, which enacted laws intended to stop the publication of sexually indecent images. One key provision of this was "no images in which pubic hair is visible". But rather than stopping artists and photographers from showing nekkid females, it merely stopped them from showing nekkid females with pubic hair. Which makes them look a bit like children, and in the minds of some Japanese men, has eroticized those childlike features.
But like I said, most Japanese men have no interest in sex with little girls. They may indulge in school-girl fantasies and role-play, they may want their female partners to sport the hairless look of the porn they grew up beating off to. They are obsessed with youth Just Like American Men. But the Japanese are not (as a culture) obsessed with molesting young girls.

Re:What the fuck is wrong with the Japanese? (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273522)

Why do they feel the need to portray the molestation of them in video games, their poorly-drawn comics and cartoons, and even at their comic book conventions?

Basically every other modern culture has realized that there are some things that you just don't do to or with children.

In all fairness, it's works of fiction. Just because it acceptable to portray it in fiction doesn't mean we actually find it acceptable to do in real life. A drawing of abuse has no equivalence to actual abuse.

Re:OH NOES! (4, Insightful)

Carewolf (581105) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273314)

I think someone confused Sweden and Scandinavia. Swedes are prudes, and have really weird laws. Denmark on the hand has legalized prostitution, and considers nudity acceptable most places, and sex in public legal as long as you "try" to be discrete.

Re:OH NOES! (2)

hitmark (640295) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273662)

All the mentioned nations have their own odd laws regarding porn and sexuality.

Speaking from a Norwegians perspective, we are allowed to own porn, but one can not sell it. End result is import from Sweden.

As for sex, the minimum age is 18, tho the judge can show leniency down to 16 if both parties are of similar level of development or something like that. I think the rule of thumb is a 5 years age difference, max.

What i think has happened here is that there is one distributor handling the whole region. And when a stink was raised in Sweden, they pulled it from everywhere rather then dealing with it on a nation by nation basis.

Re:OH NOES! (1)

Krakadoom (1407635) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273316)

Easy, this is just the distributor being unreasonably worried - not the authorities actually requesting the game be pulled. Anyway hentai isn't even illegal in Denmark, so why should an upskirt shot of some animated broad be a problem?

Should be mandatory (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273164)

All new games should come with porn modes.

Re:Should be mandatory (1)

plunderscratch (2169382) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273320)

Up up down down left right left right B A select start

Re:Should be mandatory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273496)

Or up down up down up down up down up down ... done roll over and fall asleep.

Don't RTFA (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273172)

Don't bother clicking the link. There aren't any pictures.

Re:Don't RTFA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273722)

So it didn't happen!

Pull it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273180)

Pull it from all countries until that function is removed...what's the point of even having that function? I mean, other than to be perverse....

Tomorrow's news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273192)

Cameras banned to prevent people taking photos up children's skirts.

CHILD!? (5, Insightful)

Windwraith (932426) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273226)

Child? You call those virtual plastic-y goddesses of bounce physics CHILDREN?
What is becoming of this world...?

If there's grass on the field ... let them fight (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273234)

So it's OK to have 17 year old characters pummel each other so long as you don't see their underwear?

Norway (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273250)

is not an EU member state.

Simple fix... (5, Insightful)

ThoughtMonster (1602047) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273284)

Make them 18!

Re:Simple fix... (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273404)

That's our solution in America, but to be honest I don't really get it. I can understand not depicting characters that are clearly prepubescent in pornographic situations, but once the characters start looking post-pubescent, I'm not sure what difference it really makes as there's no way of really knowing one way or the other and the description in that dimension isn't going to be particularly influential to the viewers.

Re:Simple fix... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273706)

Make them 18!

It's a brilliant solution. Just have a formal announcement that the characters just had a birthday. Throw a birthday party for them in each of the complaining countries and everyone get on with their lives!

Norway and EU (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273286)

I'm pretty sure Norway is not a member of EU.

Also, Norway is not a member of the EU, however: (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273290)

Norway has ties to the EU through various treaties which force most of the EU laws on Norwegian citizens anyway.

Modern society (3, Insightful)

Noughmad (1044096) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273300)

There's a game with the word "Dead" in its name, and people have a problem with it because you can look up women's skirts?

Re:Modern society (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273414)

I suppose if the players could blow them away from that vantage point, it would be acceptable.
And, as another post said, bounce physics animation = child pron? I mean, Jesus, why the fuck would Nintendo even include the capacity to upskirt, and how desperate do you have to be to go looking for it (and getting excited by it)?

Re:Modern society (2)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273462)

Hey, nobody gave half a shit if they wore long dresses while bludgeon each other to a gory death with baseball bats.

Re:Modern society (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273516)

Everyone eventually dies, but not everyone looks up women's skirts.

Plain wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273310)

Norway is not part of EU, and the sexual age limit here is 16. Nor are there any prior cases where people has been prosecuted over offences towards imaginary characters so I really dont get where they get this from.

Or you could save yourself millions... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273312)

Change the story and say they just turned 18.

Pull it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273338)

Pull it from all countries until that function is deleted. What's the point of it? Other than to be perverse....

WTF? (4, Insightful)

Ephemeriis (315124) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273346)

You've got to be kidding me... This is so ridiculous I can't believe it's real.

It's a video game. They aren't real people. It's pixels on a screen. No child is being harmed, regardless of where you position the camera.

I also doubt if there's much to look at under those skirts. I doubt if the developers spent much time rendering realistic genitalia that'll likely never be seen... And if they were seen, would just generate outrage.

Further, they're 17 in the game. Here in the US that's just one year shy of legal adulthood. Are you telling me that there's some magical transformation on your 18th birthday that renders you immune to the psychological harm of somebody looking at your crotch?

But even if we accept that this is some kind of virtual child pornography that's somehow exploiting underage pixels... If we really want to make sure we protect the children... It's somehow OK to brutally beat them to a pulp? I mean, Dead or Alive is a fighting game. A "beat'em up". Like Tekken or Soul Calibur or Mortal Combat or Street Fighter... It's OK to pummel some virtual 17-year-old girl into a bloody mess, but it isn't OK to look up her skirt? How does that make any kind of sense?

Re:WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273434)

laws are meant to remove thought from the judgement process.

and this is what we are left with: mindless drones (politicians) making rules without any sense or reason.

we could probably strike down 90% of the laws on the books (in all countries) and be better off for it.

laws should age out and have to be rigorously defended or they will expire. but again, that would be too sensible.

the older I get, the more I see the world as an unjust, random, cruel and mindless place. each day I believe this more and more.

Re:WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273448)

The backgound is the a Swedish Manga translator got convicted for child-pornography for some hentai that he had in his computer. The age of consent in Swedn is 15, however you may not show sexualised pictures of anyone under 18. For some sick reason a court of law ruled that that included cartoons.

Re:WTF? (1)

geekmux (1040042) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273584)

...Further, they're 17 in the game. Here in the US that's just one year shy of legal adulthood. Are you telling me that there's some magical transformation on your 18th birthday that renders you immune to the psychological harm of somebody looking at your crotch?

Short answer according to the law? Fuck Yes.

18 = look all you want, no harm, no foul

17 = could result in being a convicted felon(lewd and lascivious, indecent acts) and most likely a registered sex offender for life

I never said the laws make sense, but don't sit here and just blow off 17 as "one year shy" like it's no big deal within the legal framework today. The difference between those ages, as I've pointed out here, can be permanently life-altering.

Re:WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273642)

What's even crazier is that Kasumi was 17 a decade ago on the PS1. You'd think they'd have bumped the ages up a few years in the interim just for the sake of the in game story. Well, what there is of one, anyway.

Re:WTF? (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273652)

No child is being harmed, regardless of where you position the camera.

But Nintendo can be harmed when someone asks why the camera is being allowed that particular view. The game developer can be harmed when someone asks why the camera is being allowed that particular view.

Because there are no good answers.

Hey, Nintendo! (2)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273354)

Next time just let their skirts ride up a bit while they get gunned down with the blood splattering the screen from the inside. That should be ok.

Norway? (1)

wvmarle (1070040) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273370)

Factual error in the summary: Norway is not a member of the EU.

Of course it's by now one of the very few countries in Europe that has chosen to stay out of the EU, still they're not a member and likely won't become a member anytime soon.

Not illegal in Denmark. (1)

phagstrom (451510) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273416)

There is no way in hell this is illegal in Denmark and I doubt that it is illegal in Sweden & Norway. In reading the article this seems more a matter of being afraid that the game or company might get the stigma of paedophilia attached to it.

Keeping child molesters away from children = Good

Saying that everything involving children is child molestation = Not so much.

Re:Not illegal in Denmark. (1)

cronius (813431) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273650)

IANAL, but I believe this [lovdata.no] is the Norwegian law in question (translation courtesy of google):

204a. Whoever

a. produce, acquire, introduce, possess, leaving to another or for a fee or systematically familiarize themselves with the production of sexual abuse against children or representations sexualising children,

b. concerned with depictions of sexual abuse of children or representations as sexualising children, otherwise referred to in 204, first paragraph, or

c. misleads anyone under 18 to have himself photographed as part of the commercial production of motion and motionless pictures with adult content, or produce such representations where anyone under 18 is depicted,

punishable by fines or imprisonment for up to 3 years.

                With children the purposes of this section, persons who are or appear to be under 18.

                Anyone who negligently performs the action specified in the first paragraph, punished by fines or imprisonment for up to 6 months. At the same penalty the owner or parent who willfully or negligently fails to prevent it in a business is carried out actions described in the first paragraph.

                The penalty can be eliminated for the taking and possessing an image of a person between 16 and 18, if it has given their consent and the two are roughly equal in age and development.

                  204 second paragraph, second and fourth paragraphs shall apply correspondingly.

Added by Act of May 20, 2005 No. 29

Emphasis (for what I think is relevant) mine. The law was probably written in good intent, but I think cartoons (which this basically is) being illegal is just crazy, it should count as free speech.

It does define children as persons though, so I would say it's not actually illegal (since a fictional character is not a person).

Pulled from Denmark, due to swedish laws??? (0)

TheSunborn (68004) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273456)

This is wierd. The text says:
"but the back-story for some of the characters has led to a possible breach of child protection legislation in Sweden."

And
"The game will now no longer be available in Sweden, Denmark, or Norway - despite no formal investigation having yet been made".

So they pull the game from Denmark and Norway because it may break the law in Sweden?

Oh and I case you wonder, The legal minimum age for having sex in Denmark is 15  (18 If you have a professional (teacher/Student) relationship)  so I really can't see the reason to pull it.

Re:Pulled from Denmark, due to swedish laws??? (1)

Zironic (1112127) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273614)

It's because Sweden, Norway and Denmark are the same distribution region.

Re:Pulled from Denmark, due to swedish laws??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273734)

and the distributor in question would be Bergsala AB

Re:Pulled from Denmark, due to swedish laws??? (1)

PPH (736903) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273616)

Oh and I case you wonder, The legal minimum age for having sex in Denmark is 15

You just can't look at it until they are 18?

Re:Pulled from Denmark, due to swedish laws??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273710)

That's not so outlandish. Even here in Australia the age of consent in regards to sex is 16, but it's not legal to look at pornography until you're 18. Makes no sense to me.

Ha, Ha, Ha, Who Is Kidding Who, Yuk, Yuk... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273518)

Bet this will boost sales....

simple solution (1)

SuperDre (982372) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273556)

the simplest solution would have been to change her age from 17 to 18, no-one would notice the difference, hell I sometimes can't tell the difference between 14 year olds and 18 year olds in the bar I'm working at..

Hypocrisy? (1)

HalAtWork (926717) | more than 3 years ago | (#36273636)

You see less when you look up their skirts than if they were wearing only bathing suits. They had no problem with the EU releases of Dead or Alive: Xtreme Beach Volleyball 1 & 2, which features the same girls in bathing suits.

Age them (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36273688)

Add "1 year later" to the title, and say the girls are now 18.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>