The British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) will launch cinema-style age ratings for film downloads within a couple of months.
A spokeswoman at the BBFC told Register Hardware that the online classifications are designed to give movie download fans the same understanding of a film’s content as they currently get when buying …
I reckon the BBFC do a good job, but every so often things get messy. Either some politician starts leaning on them, or, as affected <i>Enter the Dragon</i> for many years, somebody in the BBFC enforces some rather too arbitrary a rule.
On the whole, I'd rather have the BBFC expanded, taking advantage of their experience, but I don't trust the politicians to safeguard us against somebody's personal hang-ups about rice flails.
How the hell do they expect to make this work? As it is, classification only works (up to a point) when age can be physically verified (cinema's, rental stores... the local supermarket on DVD release day). After that the current (flawed) system goes to pot... Parents LET their 'kids' watch films that are 'unsuitable' for their age. I dare say that most of the time it is the parents buying the films for the kids too. Do the BBFC really think most parents really give a flying fig if their 16 year old son is watching a 18 cert film?
Also, whats stopping little Johny Smith (14) from 'borrowing' his dads credit card and renting/purchasing a downloadable movie with an 18 Cert?
MORE emphasis (than what is already in place) should be placed upon the actual content of a film... It should then be up to the parents to make an informed decision about whether they think a film is suitable for their 'child' or not... even then, that would never be fool proof.
Seems like the BBFC are just trying to justify their worthless existance really as EVERYBODY knows that film classifications DON'T WORK. Come the release of Rambo 4 (or whatever number it is now!) every schoolboy in the country will be watching it after borrowing the DVD from their elder brother or something.
Paris because she knows all about films with content not suitable for children!
"The classifications will be voluntary because the Video Recordings Act doesn’t require downloaded content to carry legally binding BBFC classifications."
Of course it has to be voluntary. How can they 'enforce' it?
Paris because I think even she could see the stupidity of this kind of announcement
There's something I find deeply worrying and insipid about people who want to protect me. I don't mean the Armed Forces or the Health Service or even some designer who packs a new car with airbags. I'm talking about the people like the BBFC who, despite us all being grown adults, are determined to protect us under the South Park guise of "...why won't someone think of the children!!!"
I don't believe young kids should be watching slasher flicks but when you get into the difference between 12 and 18 rated stuff, chances are the 12 year old will go to a mates house and watch said slasher flick because the mate's brother or something has it. This is the way REAL LIFE works, regardless of the intentions of some very well meaning but ultimately interfering censors.
U - Universal Downloads; 15 - Lasts for 15 days before DRM kicks in; PG - Pretty Ghastly, unsuitable for Adults; 18 - Probably worth burning to disk; X - anything from UTube etc; XX - anything with heterosexual congress in it; XXX - threesomes; XXXX - contains prolonged and graphic representations of beer drinking
Register
Coming soon: classifications for movie downloads
The British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) will launch cinema-style age ratings for film downloads within a couple of months. A spokeswoman at the BBFC told Register Hardware that the online classifications are designed to give movie download fans the same understanding of a film’s content as they currently get when buying …
This topic is closed for new posts.
Posted Thursday 3rd April 2008 15:13 GMT
Dave Bell
Mixed feelings. #
I reckon the BBFC do a good job, but every so often things get messy. Either some politician starts leaning on them, or, as affected <i>Enter the Dragon</i> for many years, somebody in the BBFC enforces some rather too arbitrary a rule.
On the whole, I'd rather have the BBFC expanded, taking advantage of their experience, but I don't trust the politicians to safeguard us against somebody's personal hang-ups about rice flails.
Posted Thursday 3rd April 2008 15:30 GMT
Anonymous Coward
One for the stupid idea's #
How the hell do they expect to make this work? As it is, classification only works (up to a point) when age can be physically verified (cinema's, rental stores... the local supermarket on DVD release day). After that the current (flawed) system goes to pot... Parents LET their 'kids' watch films that are 'unsuitable' for their age. I dare say that most of the time it is the parents buying the films for the kids too. Do the BBFC really think most parents really give a flying fig if their 16 year old son is watching a 18 cert film?
Also, whats stopping little Johny Smith (14) from 'borrowing' his dads credit card and renting/purchasing a downloadable movie with an 18 Cert?
MORE emphasis (than what is already in place) should be placed upon the actual content of a film... It should then be up to the parents to make an informed decision about whether they think a film is suitable for their 'child' or not... even then, that would never be fool proof.
Seems like the BBFC are just trying to justify their worthless existance really as EVERYBODY knows that film classifications DON'T WORK. Come the release of Rambo 4 (or whatever number it is now!) every schoolboy in the country will be watching it after borrowing the DVD from their elder brother or something.
Paris because she knows all about films with content not suitable for children!
Posted Thursday 3rd April 2008 15:30 GMT
Paul
Oh shucks - no more torrent movies #
"The classifications will be voluntary because the Video Recordings Act doesn’t require downloaded content to carry legally binding BBFC classifications."
Of course it has to be voluntary. How can they 'enforce' it?
Paris because I think even she could see the stupidity of this kind of announcement
Posted Thursday 3rd April 2008 15:31 GMT
Anonymous Coward
Redundant #
Surely 99% of downloaded content will have had a cinematic or DVD release and therefore the certificate will already have been granted?
Or are they proposing to certify every YouTube clip?
This post has been deleted by its author
Posted Thursday 3rd April 2008 18:57 GMT
Anonymous Coward
And while you're downloading a G rated movie for your kids... #
you can open up a browser and surf the net for free porn.
Paris, because...
Posted Friday 4th April 2008 00:20 GMT
Anonymous Coward
BBFC at it again.... #
There's something I find deeply worrying and insipid about people who want to protect me. I don't mean the Armed Forces or the Health Service or even some designer who packs a new car with airbags. I'm talking about the people like the BBFC who, despite us all being grown adults, are determined to protect us under the South Park guise of "...why won't someone think of the children!!!"
I don't believe young kids should be watching slasher flicks but when you get into the difference between 12 and 18 rated stuff, chances are the 12 year old will go to a mates house and watch said slasher flick because the mate's brother or something has it. This is the way REAL LIFE works, regardless of the intentions of some very well meaning but ultimately interfering censors.
Posted Friday 4th April 2008 11:05 GMT
Slaine
Suggestions for Classifications #
U - Universal Downloads; 15 - Lasts for 15 days before DRM kicks in; PG - Pretty Ghastly, unsuitable for Adults; 18 - Probably worth burning to disk; X - anything from UTube etc; XX - anything with heterosexual congress in it; XXX - threesomes; XXXX - contains prolonged and graphic representations of beer drinking
This topic is closed for new posts.