Материал: disser_arhipov

98

billion computer gamers in the world,126 and establishing these kinds of correlations does not seem very convincing. We emphasize, however, that for the context of our work it is illustrative to postulate the link between real aggression and “violence” in games. In our view, and we will elaborate on this in Chapter 3 of this study, the question of what constitutes violence in games can be addressed not only to psychologists but also to lawyers – it is a question of legal interpretation and functional adequacy between what is violence in reality and what is conventionally called “violence” in games. At such a turn, the issue is related to the problems of the semantic limits of law. Let us give a visual and conditional127 illustration: a realistic depiction of violence, functionally adequate to the real world (which in fact is found in a small number of truly brutal games such as the Manhunt series128) may well fall under the scope of legal regulation of children protection legislation, but if the game contains only a few “squares” (conditional pixel objects), one of which disappears in a collision with the other, on the gamer’s slang it may well mean “killed”. But with the same success we can position chess as a game of age rating “18+”, because it is a game full of cruelty and violence, where sometimes such terrible thing happens as elephants eating queens.

A balanced position on the issue of violence in games in Russian periodicals is presented in the works of A.D. Belousov. The author analyzes the current research on the possible connection between computer games and crimes in real life and concludes that not everything is obvious in this area. The main question, he claims, is –

«[i]n the context of juvenile delinquency, we consider it the most urgent task to establish not only a correlation but also a causal link between teenagers’ fascination with computer games

126According to The European Mobile Game Market, the total number of players in computer games in 2016 is more than 2.5 billion people. See: Video Gaming Industry Overview // WePC. May 2018. – [Electronic resource]. – [Site]. – URL: https://www.wepc.com/news/video-game-statistics/ (accessed: 11.01.2019).

127Conditional – because in most modern games the design is somewhere in the middle between these polar examples.

128See: Manhunt [Electronic resource] // Rockstar Games. – [Site]. – URL: https://www.rockstargames.com/manhunt/ (accessed: 21.02.2019).

99

containing scenes of violence and the characteristics of individual components of their personality structure, which, in turn, may also lead to their criminal behaviour».129

The author notes a number of correlations, but points out that

«[t]he question remains: does a minor’s personality change destructively under the influence of games containing scenes of violence and unmotivated cruelty, or, on the contrary, do teenagers with the appropriate psychological characteristics choose audio-visual products mainly with such content? Moreover, opinions are expressed about the positive role of these game situations, which allow both children and adults to remove unnecessary aggression outside real interpersonal relations. In addition, some researchers believe that the likelihood of negative personal development under the influence of a passion for computer games should be considered to be very high».130

Based on the experience of studying information in the system of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, as well as his own study of the alleged relationship, A.D. Belousov concludes that there is no reliable link between the relevant indicators, but points out that “cruel” computer games can act as one of several external environmental influences that partially predetermine subsequent behavior, and advocates the development of a system of age ratings (later expressed in the system of norms of the Children Protection Law, adopted after his article was published).131 Similar results of comparative analysis of modern research are reflected in the results of the project of Saint Petersburg State University.132

In the context of the above discussion, the experience of recognizing computer sport as a sport is also interesting.133 In particular, not all kinds (genres) of computer games

129Belousov A.D. To the Question of the Influence of Computer Games on the Criminal Behavior of Minors [Electronic resource] // Administrative Law and Process. 2007. No. 6. – Access from the legal reference system «ConsultantPlus» (accessed: 10.01.2019). – Para. 13.

130Ibid. Para. 14–17.

131Ibid. Para. 18–25.

132See: Useful Games: Global Research on Interactive Entertainment. Expert Council of Game Industry and Saint Petersburg State University on Unproven Harm to Video Games // DTF. – [Website]. – URL: https://dtf.ru/gamedev/5940– poleznye–igry–mirovye–issledovaniya–interaktivnyh–razvlecheniy (accessed: 21.02.2019).

133In 2016, for the second time, the Russian Ministry of Sports and Tourism included computer sports in the number of recognized sports (Order of the Russian Ministry of Sports and Tourism No. 470 of 29.04.2016), and in 2017 – into the

100

seemingly correspond to sports ethics and, as a consequence, not all of them are recognized. The reason is that some of them are believed to be based on violence, which, in some cases, is contrary to the Olympic approach. At the same time, a kind of “violence” is also found in recognized “discipline programs” of computer sports (i.e. specific computer games). Here, too, we approach the question of how the discussion of “violent” computer games is linked to the subject matter of this paper. Of course, the debate about the benefits or harms of computer games is far beyond the scope of this study, but the debate about how the term “violence”, as used in the Children Protection Law, should be legally interpreted is of direct relevance to the subject matter of the semantic limits of the law.

To clarify this thesis, let us consider three examples from the videogame industry: one of the first popular games “Space Invaders”,134 eSports discipline “Dota 2”135 and the “definitely brutal” game banned in a number of countries around the world “Manhunt”.136 On the example of specific materials from these games, it is obvious that from the external point of view “violence” is expressed in quite different ways – from the collision of pixels with a minimum of context and connotations in the first case (hardly the same violence that we see in the real world), to the photorealistic interactive process in the latter case. For the purposes of this paper, it is not so much the question of whether, and if so how, to restrict minors’ access to information products containing images or descriptions of violence that is of interest, but rather the question of when and under what conditions a set of abstract

number of sports developed at the federal level (Order of the Russian Ministry of Sports and Tourism No. 16.03.2017, № 183 in the edition of the Order of the Ministry of Sports of Russia from 22.01.2018 № 49), while the Federation of Computer Sports of Russia was accredited as the All-Russian Sports Federation (Order of the Ministry of Sports of Russia from 05.07.2017 № 618). A detailed analysis of the legal aspects of cybersports by the author is provided in the following publication: Arkhipov V.V. eSports Law: Fact or Fiction? // Zakon. 2018. No. 5. P. 80–92. See also the following general article: Hamari J., Sjöblom M. What is eSports and why do people watch it? // Internet Research. – Vol. 27. – Issue 2. – PP. 211–232.

134 See: Space Invaders. Electronic Game [Electronic resource] // Encyclopaedia Britannica. – [Site]. – URL: https://www.britannica.com/topic/Space-Invaders (accessed: 21.02.2019).

135Dota 2 [Electronic resource] // Dota 2. – [Site]. – URL: http://ru.dota2.com/ (accessed: 21.02.2019).

136Manhunt [Electronic resource] // Rockstar Games. – [Site]. – URL: https://www.rockstargames.com/manhunt/ (accessed: 21.02.2019).

101

pixels on the monitor screen can be legally interpreted as “violence”.137 This question is immediately and directly related to one of the criteria for the semantic limits of law developed in Chapter 3 of this study.

§ 3.3. Protecting historical memory with the instruments of criminal and administrative law

Let us turn to other examples. The issue of artistic imagination (or, probably, other kinds of “virtual” nature of information) is also relevant for the domains of administrative and criminal law connected to the protection of public interest in historical memory. The practice knows well Article 20.3 of the Code of Administrative Violations of the Russian Federation (hereinafter, the “CAV”). Part 1 Article 20.3 of the CAV provides administrative liability for propaganda or public demonstration of Nazi attributes or symbols, or attributes or symbols that are confusingly similar to the Nazi attributes or symbols, or attributes or symbols of extremist organizations, or attributes or symbols that are prohibited from propagating or public demonstration by federal laws. At the same time, neither Article 20.3 of the CAV, nor the Federal Law of 19.05.1995 No. 80FZ “On Commemorating of the Victory of Soviet People in the Great Patriotic War of 1941 – 1945” which it refers to,138 contains any reservations not only about artistic works,

137By the way, from the point of view of sociology of law we can offer the following hypothesis. In the twentieth century as a whole, more and more prohibitions of violence are being established as a “way of solving the problem”, including as a way of protecting honor and dignity. The use of fighting (not to mention a duel) in response to insult in modern legal systems will lead to the application of punishment to the insulted side rather than to the offending side. In a sense, victims of non-material affronts are deprived of behaviors that were both socially acceptable and socially encouraged until recently. In the moral sense, a person becomes defenceless against those who do not encroach on his physical body. One cannot be called to a fight, one cannot hit in return. As a consequence, and as a reaction to this, there is a growing sense of the need for an equivalent legal replacement of historical means of protecting honor and dignity. Hence the sudden “aggravation” of the information sensitivity of both individual citizens and society. Practice in the field of honor and dignity (individual citizens) and information restrictions (society) is developing. Accordingly, the development of the rule of law and legal outlook predetermines the restriction of the right to freedom of speech. Literally, according to Hobbes, the “war of all against all” is replaced by total prohibitions of Leviathan.

138Para. 3 Article 6 of the Federal Law No. 80-FZ of 19 May 1995 “On the perpetuation of the victory of the Soviet people in the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945” prohibits the propaganda or public display of the attributes or symbols of

102

but also about academic or other similar sources. This has already given a rise to a number of controversial situations. While we earnestly support the values reflected in the preamble to the aforesaid law,139 we have to note a conceptual legal contradiction that appears if we read the term “public demonstration” literally or in broad sense. If prohibited symbols cannot be publicly demonstrated, this means that legally important decision on what relates to this symbols and what not, shall be made based on the information that is not publicly available. At the same time, the meaning of the principle reflected in Part 3 Article 15 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation means not only that laws and any normative acts that affect rights, freedoms and obligations of human an citizen (and in this case we speak about both obligations and constitutional rights, including right to disseminate information freely, participate in creative activities, teach and receive access to cultural values) are subject to mandatory publishing, but also that disposition of the relevant legal rules shall be known to a citizen. Otherwise the assumption that the laws are known could not work. It is precisely this argumentation that can work as formal legal argument for reservation on academic or other purposes in respect of other norms that limit dissemination of information. Nevertheless, it is ignored in this case. Of course, we can resort to the historical interpretation and say that currently, when such limitation is relevant in historical perspective, everyone “in any case” knows what symbols are prohibited, however this argument could hardly be seen as reasonable and corresponding to the nature of legal argumentation. It is more likely that here we need to admit a gap in law and speak bout

organizations that have cooperated with groups, organizations, movements or persons recognized as criminal or guilty of committing crimes under the verdict of the International Military Tribunal for the Prosecution and Punishment of the Principal War Criminals of the European Axis Countries (Nuremberg Tribunal) or by judgments of national, military or occupation tribunals based on the judgement of the International Military Tribunal for the trial and punishment of the main European war criminals (the Nuremberg Tribunal) or rendered during the Great Patriotic War, the Second World War.

139 As the preamble reads: “Proceeding from the traditions of the peoples of Russia, to keep and preserve the memory of the defenders of the Motherland and of those who gave their lives in the struggle for its freedom and independence, taking into account that care for the participants, veterans and victims of the war is a historical duty of society and the State, taking into account the popular and liberating nature of the Great Patriotic War, the participation in it of the peoples of Europe and other continents, the need for international cooperation in order to maintain general peace and harmony, and the prevention of manifestations of fascism in any form, this Federal Law is adopted”.