4 ms·
At some point we have to consider it the parent's/guardian's responsibility to restrict a child's access to any service that provides access to online, user-gen
by CivBase 4y ago
At some point we have to consider it the parent's/guardian's responsibility to restrict a child's access to any service that provides access to online, user-generated content without supervision.
Despite all my problems with Epic, I agree with OP here. This should not be Epic's problem. This is a problem for parents/guardians and the ESRB/PEGI. The ESRB and PEGI rated the game for 13+ and 12+ respectively, which I'd argue is appropriate, so IMO it should be entirely a problem for the parents/guardians.
- Dalewyn 4y agoTranslating what FTC is saying to plain English, FTC is saying Epic didn't do enough to move liability away from them (Epic) and onto the parents/guardian. The liability ball was still in Epic's court, so FTC fined them. If Epic had some form of age verification in place, past that point it's the parents'/guardian's problem whether the kid lies or the kid asks them to give their authorization. The liability ball would be in the parents'/guardian's court. It's why all software and websites that handle data coming from underage kids always verify age or straight up don't handle that data (eg: Youtube Kids videos' comments, the lack thereof) at all. Obligatory IANAL.
- BryantD 4y agoI’d recommend reading the complaint. To my surprise, regardless of the ratings, Epic was explicitly marketing to 10+. Like there are written statements to that effect.
- blitzar 4y ago> Epic was explicitly marketing to 10+ Translated to english this means they were marketing to 6-14 year olds.