Ban Minecraft? That's jive, Turkey!

Censors get squeamish over blocky violence

The wildly popular sandbox game Minecraft is facing a possible ban in Turkey.

English-language Hurriyet Daily News reports that the nation's Family Ministry will soon file a legal complaint seeking to halt sales of the game and ban its playing in Turkey.

According to the report, officials are worried that the combat elements of the game's survival mode encourage violence against other players and animals. In survival mode, players are tasked with building a house and mining elements while also fighting off enemy monsters and killing animals for food.

Authorities are said to be worried that the combat functions in the game encourage children to be hostile towards others and encourage the mistreatment of animals.

Minecraft is the brainchild of Swedish developer Markus 'Notch' Persson who, in 2009, developed the game and two years later handed it off to other developers at his Mojang software house.

Since its launch, the game has become a global sensation in large part to its open world building environment. Users have the ability to build everything from houses and castles to functioning computer science projects.

Notch, meanwhile, has cashed out his share in the game, taking a $2.5bn buyout from Microsoft and riding off into the sunset.

It's unlikely that Minecraft will feel much of a hit if the game is in fact banned in Turkey. According to Mojang, more than 18.8 million people have bought copies of the game to date.

The company would also find itself in rather good company should Turkish authorities ban its flagship product. Earlier this year the government hit Twitter with extensive censorship demands, while on other occasions Turkey has banned YouTube and even Google Books. ®

Other stories you might like

  • Venezuelan cardiologist charged with designing and selling ransomware
    If his surgery was as bad as his opsec, this chap has caused a lot of trouble

    The US Attorney’s Office has charged a 55-year-old cardiologist with creating and selling ransomware and profiting from revenue-share agreements with criminals who deployed his product.

    A complaint [PDF] filed on May 16th in the US District Court, Eastern District of New York, alleges that Moises Luis Zagala Gonzalez – aka “Nosophoros,” “Aesculapius” and “Nebuchadnezzar” – created a ransomware builder known as “Thanos”, and ransomware named “Jigsaw v. 2”.

    The self-taught coder and qualified cardiologist advertised the ransomware in dark corners of the web, then licensed it ransomware to crooks for either $500 or $800 a month. He also ran an affiliate network that offered the chance to run Thanos to build custom ransomware, in return for a share of profits.

    Continue reading
  • China reveals its top five sources of online fraud
    'Brushing' tops the list, as quantity of forbidden content continue to rise

    China’s Ministry of Public Security has revealed the five most prevalent types of fraud perpetrated online or by phone.

    The e-commerce scam known as “brushing” topped the list and accounted for around a third of all internet fraud activity in China. Brushing sees victims lured into making payment for goods that may not be delivered, or are only delivered after buyers are asked to perform several other online tasks that may include downloading dodgy apps and/or establishing e-commerce profiles. Victims can find themselves being asked to pay more than the original price for goods, or denied promised rebates.

    Brushing has also seen e-commerce providers send victims small items they never ordered, using profiles victims did not create or control. Dodgy vendors use that tactic to then write themselves glowing product reviews that increase their visibility on marketplace platforms.

    Continue reading
  • Oracle really does owe HPE $3b after Supreme Court snub
    Appeal petition as doomed as the Itanic chips at the heart of decade-long drama

    The US Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear Oracle's appeal to overturn a ruling ordering the IT giant to pay $3 billion in damages for violating a decades-old contract agreement.

    In June 2011, back when HPE had not yet split from HP, the biz sued Oracle for refusing to add Itanium support to its database software. HP alleged Big Red had violated a contract agreement by not doing so, though Oracle claimed it explicitly refused requests to support Intel's Itanium processors at the time.

    A lengthy legal battle ensued. Oracle was ordered to cough up $3 billion in damages in a jury trial, and appealed the decision all the way to the highest judges in America. Now, the Supreme Court has declined its petition.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022