3 ms·
That said, COPPA concerns will almost certainly come into consideration here. It's not just data storage, but ways that Personally Identifying Information (PII)
by mjfisher 11y ago
That said, COPPA concerns will almost certainly come into consideration here. It's not just data storage, but ways that Personally Identifying Information (PII) might be shared through a product, and whether that sharing is approved by a responsible adult, etc.
User generated content is almost always a candidate for PII leakage; for example in a block building game, you might reasonably expect a player to proudly build their full name in huge letters for all the world to see. If other players in game can see it, and a legal guardian hasn't approved that kind of behaviour (and been unambiguously informed that their child can do that) then you've got a COPPA violation. And COPPA violations are routinely prosecuted, so you need to pay attention when making a product explicitly targeted at under 13s. It makes it remarkably hard to design games for kids that are both creative and social.
It feels very bureaucratic, but despite that I still very much believe it's worth having legal safeguards like COPPA; we're still in an era where society is changing drastically in response to the internet and I wouldn't want to see the more vulnerable members of it open to exploitation.
- mike_hearn 11y ago> It feels very bureaucratic, but despite that I still very much believe it's worth having legal safeguards like COPPA; we're still in an era where society is changing drastically in response to the internet Surely that's an argument for not having COPPA? Social standards are changing but laws, once enacted, almost never do - they tend to freeze an arbitrary set of moral judgements in place and prevent people exploring any alternatives. As you note, would Minecraft exist in Notch had lived in the USA and a friend had helpfully informed him about COPPA early on? Perhaps the risk of letting people build anything with no age verification would have seemed too risky, yet the cost and overhead of age verification + subsequent retarded user based growth would have seemed to make the project not worthwhile. I've yet to see any real evidence based studies that show COPPA solves any real problem. It appears to be a classic case of "something must be done, this is something, therefore it must be done".
- mjfisher 11y agoI don't think so - it certainly doesn't feel like security theatre to me. Minecraft never had to worry about COPPA; Notch never set out to create a game targeted explicitly at children (it's just since found a huge market there) and player tend to host Minecraft servers themselves, which neatly side-steps a lot of the issues. I work in an area of the industry that does regularly make multiplayer games and apps for kids. A number of clients have commissioned MMO style games through us, but their visions are usually optimistic and centred around letting kids play and explore freely. Without extensive guidance from us, they'd often want to allow things like free chat within a game world without getting explicit parental consent first - which is great for building a community of players and allowing them to interact, but a nightmare to police adequately. It requires a lot of moderation overhead, which comes with technology and staffing costs that might not be otherwise expected. This isn't just another "think of the children!" style blanket statement with no real thought behind it. There is a real threat here. Most users in an young online community are kids who interact constructively. There might be occasional bits of swearing or abuse, but that's not really a problem. Kids enjoy breaking social taboos because it's naughty and funny. I really don't think that poses a danger in any way, although it can do damage to a brand if it becomes prevalent and public enough. There are though a small number of adult sexual offenders that attempt to target and exploit children using these services. They do exist, and they are persistent and very difficult to defend against. I've worked closely with a number of companies that provide third party moderation tools that attempt to profile and flag such offenders through fairly sophisticated language profiling. It's difficult; there are certain otherwise innocuous words that offenders use to avoid writing anything directly incriminating. I don't worry too much about children shouting out "Penis!" in a chat room. I do worry about them divulging their home address, or agreeing to a meet somewhere, or (more commonly) being coerced into a webcam chat. We don't need studies to attempt to see where lack of thought in this area can lead; we have actual events. There's a famous example in Habbo Hotel, where lack of adequate moderation led to a scandal the ended up with the owners turning off chat entirely (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18424400 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18424400). Had there been protection laws enforced in that example, Habbo might not have ended up in that situation and its young players might not have been sexually exploited (http://www.brentwoodgazette.co.uk/Billericay-sports-coach-Matthew-Leonard-jailed/story-14269044-detail/story.html http://www.brentwoodgazette.co.uk/Billericay-sports-coach-Ma...). I'm sure the law will be (as usual) slow to react to change. But I'd rather it there than have no protection at all. It doesn't take malice to expose children to danger - just careless product design. There needs to be some legal liability to provide pressure to stop that happening.