Well, I went on another ban-spree, handing out perma-bans to several users for being underage. I've done an awful lot of these over the past 6 months, and I wanted to write up a quick note about it here to explain why we have to ban under-age users.
The United States has a federal law that we must follow as an Internet business, that states we are not allowed to store any information about users under the age of 13 without parental consent.
Due to the sheer number of users we have on the site, trying to get parental consent from so many users would be an overwhelming task, so we opted for the easier route of saying that users under the age of 13 are not permitted to register an account on the site.
And because we don't want to dabble in international law either, we apply this rule to users from ALL countries, not just the United States.
If we find that you are underage, we are FORCED, by law, to disable your account right away. We can only re-enable your account if you send us valid proof of your birthdate with a note and signature from a parent or guardian.
If you want to use the Contact page to find out how you can send us this information, Justin can forward some information.
So here's the deal: if you admit to being underage, we can 'ause' your account until you turn 13. It will look and feel like a perma-ban because it uses the same controls, and your friends on the site will not have access to your profile any longer. However, once you send us proof of your 13th birthday, we can re-enable (un-ban) your account, and you can pick up where you left off.
However, if we disable your account, and you create an additional account to circumvent the ban, we will mark your old account to never be re-enabled/un-banned.
If your account has been shut off, and you have a question about why, you can contact us through the Contact page. Justin or I will get back to you as soon as we can to explain why.
Users are welcome to submit comments here about it, but our decision on restricting the minimum age to 13 will not change.
Isn't this law age discrimination. i mean you ban kids for having an account just because there to young. the law is mean. the only reason it is a law because people over 13 make it. grown ups make these laws just because they are older. that is kinda stupid because the kids don't have a say. some democracy this is. that is just my opinion.
Could it be due to wanting to protect these underage children? To make sure companies does not abuse the informations a child might type in without knowing what the consequences will be? More so, due to being pg13 in rating when it comes to content, it will also protect young children against exposure they might not be mature enough to understand. But, more importantly, there is no use in questioning the law here, considering it was not the staff of AG that made it, but the government in USA.
but still this keep under age kids from learning what they should play from the comments. they can't see them. Plus no one listens to the laws about the internet. how are you suposed to tell
still this keep under age kids from learning what they should play from the comments.
I don't understand how you could learn anything from reading the comments on the flash games. School teaches you English and such, so there you go.
no one listens to the laws about the internet.
Many people listen to the laws of the Internet. If they didn't, then there wouldn't be many people on AG and other websites.
how are you suposed to tell
There are laws on Armor Games, and if you are caught breaking them, then you will be punished. And by the way, everyone agreed to follow the terms and conditions of Armor Games when they were in the process of creating their account.
everyone agreed to follow the terms and conditions of Armor Games when they were in the process of creating their account.
The most lied thing ever is accepting the terms and conditions of something. (I read it somewhere.)
You do not need an account to play the games.
What happens when kids goes and plays those Crush The Castle games and want to play the undead mode? The undead mode requires an AG account to play, so kids will make an account.
we all have to do what the government says.
I've seen sites that have really babish and childish games there. But there are accounts. So who does the government expect to sign up, if kids (and babies) aren't allowed to create an account?
I've seen sites that have really babish and childish games there. But there are accounts. So who does the government expect to sign up, if kids (and babies) aren't allowed to create an account?
Sites like club penguin ask for a parents e-mail that has to be confirmed before signing up.
What happens when kids goes and plays those Crush The Castle games and want to play the undead mode? The undead mode requires an AG account to play, so kids will make an account.
They are still allowed to play the main content of said game, as well as almost all of the content stored in ArmorGames. If they want to create an account in order to play the extra content, that's great. But wait! They still have to adhere to the T&C! If they sign up without acknowledging and realizing they are underage, that is their fault entirely. AG is just trying to comply with the law.
I've seen sites that have really babish and childish games there. But there are accounts. So who does the government expect to sign up, if kids (and babies) aren't allowed to create an account?
I'd say parents and guardians of said child. They *do* have settings on computers nowadays to track and protect where said child goes. I think it's quite odd, however, that there are sites filled with children's games requiring an account to play?
I still don't understand why people are questioning it, to be honest. It's the law, we have to comply with it, and the higher-ups have to enforce it. What is there to question?
I have a quick question. What if an older brother or sister that's 13+ creates an account. It's all his/her info stored on it. Can a younger brother/sister (not 13) then use that account? It's not the younger one's information that's being stored, so he can use the account without being banned, right?
From reading that, the answer will most likely be no. For two things: 1) It's frowned upon to share an account with someone. 2) The person using the account is underaged which violates the TaC.
Suppose Person A created an account called USER X. Now, Person A is only 12, and therefore is not allowed to create an account. However, he lies and says that he is 13 on USER X.
In a hypothetical situation, lets suppose that USER X did something really, really, soopadoopa bad. Then suppose that it was noticed that while USER X was supposedly 13, he was really 12.
Could AG come under fire for allowing a child (as outlined by COPPA as anyone under age 13) on the site? Or would it be the childs responsibility as he maintained that he was indeed 13?
I think it would be the latter, but I just want to know for sure.
A lot of sites have this rule for the same reason AG does. It's due to the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act. It's not done to be a pain but for the protection of the child.
