In this blog post, we will examine the validity of the shutdown system, focusing on its effectiveness, side effects, and impact on the freedom and rights of young people.

Controversy and unfairness of the shutdown system

Recently, there has been controversy on the internet regarding the “shutdown system.” According to a Korean newspaper article published on October 14, there have been claims that a Korean professional gamer who participated in a French tournament for the game “StarCraft 2” had to suffer an unjust defeat due to his country’s “shutdown system.” The professional gamer in question is only 15 years old, which makes him subject to the “shutdown system,” and he claims that he had to give up the competition even though he was representing South Korea. With the reporting of this incident, controversy over the legitimacy of the “shutdown system” has reignited.

Definition and Background of the Shutdown System

The “shutdown system” is a system established to prevent internet game addiction among young people. It is a new provision (Article 23-3) added to the revised Youth Protection Act of South Korea on May 19, 2011, and came into effect on November 20, 2011. After a grace period, enforcement began in 2012, and the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family is the competent ministry. The core of this system is to “restrict the provision of online games to youth under the age of 16 for six hours between midnight and 6 a.m.” Companies that provide online games must forcibly block youth from using games during these hours by verifying their age and identity. This system applies primarily to PC online games that use the internet and PC package games that are accessed via CD. In the case of mobile games played on smartphones and tablet PCs, the application has been postponed for two years, reflecting the opinion that there is no serious concern about addiction as many young people do not yet own mobile devices. All games that require personal information are subject to the shutdown system, and games that do not require personal information but charge additional fees are also subject to the shutdown system. However, games such as StarCraft 1 and Diablo, which do not require personal information and do not charge additional fees, and console games such as PlayStation and Nintendo Wii, which do not require an online connection, can be used freely.

The unfairness and inefficiency of the shutdown system

I am opposed to the necessity of the shutdown system for two main reasons. First, the system has little practical effect in achieving the objectives stated by the competent authorities. Second, the system excessively restricts individual freedom. Based on these reasons, I argue that the system should be abolished.

The Shutdown System in Name Only

The unreality of the “shutdown system” is the first argument supporting the unfairness of the system. As mentioned above, if the game itself does not require personal information, the system cannot be applied. Even StarCraft, which has been the most popular game for more than 15 years since the late 1990s, is not subject to the “shutdown system.”
This means that the goal of protecting young people from game addiction cannot be achieved through the system alone. Ultimately, the “shutdown system” cannot be an essential solution. Not only that, but even games to which the “shutdown system” applies can be circumvented through certification. It is common for game users under the age of 16 to “steal” their parents’ real names and personal information, and this cannot be prevented by this system.
Therefore, considering the reality that it is easy to use other people’s personal information, the effectiveness of this system is highly questionable.
In fact, the aforementioned anecdote about a professional gamer under the age of 16 shows that this system is ineffective. The same newspaper article reported that the professional gamer, who was forced to log out of the game due to the shutdown system, was able to log back in with a different ID shortly after. This case alone clearly shows that the shutdown system cannot block game users under the age of 16 for a specific period of time. Not only is it impossible to know where the professional gamer obtained an ID that would not be affected by the shutdown system, but the ministry in charge of the shutdown system cannot disclose how many such IDs exist.
Therefore, it is difficult to prevent game addiction among young people because the current system does not allow for the implementation of connection blocking policies. The ineffectiveness of the shutdown system can also be seen in other countries. China and Thailand have implemented a “shutdown system,” but no other country maintains a mandatory blocking system like the one currently being legislated in Korea.
In China, the current system, which was similar to Korea’s shutdown system, was abolished in March 2012, and a new law was enacted to guarantee greater user autonomy. Thailand also maintained a shutdown system for two years from 2006, but the Thai government eventually abolished the law because it was ineffective.

Violation of the freedom of young people

In addition, the anti-democratic nature of the “shutdown system” is an important reason for calling for its abolition. I believe that the essence of the “shutdown system” is not to protect youth, but to interfere with their right to pursue happiness. Article 10 of the Constitution of Korea states as follows. “All people shall have human dignity and value and shall have the right to pursue happiness. The state shall recognize the inviolable basic human rights of individuals and shall have the duty to guarantee them.” The Constitution is the fundamental norm that guarantees the basic principles of the state’s governing organization and functions as well as the basic rights of its citizens, and all laws of the Republic of Korea must not violate the Constitution. However, a closer look at the details of the “shutdown system” reveals that it is an administrative law that violates Article 10 of the Constitution. In interpreting the provision on the right to pursue happiness, it could be argued that protecting young people from game addiction is more consistent with the meaning of the provision.
However, in a democratic society that values individual freedom and equality above all else, a shutdown system that completely prohibits gaming during certain hours cannot be justified by the above argument, as it significantly infringes on individual freedom. The Ministry of Gender Equality and Family, the ministry in charge of this issue, has responded to concerns about the violation of the right to pursue happiness by stating that “restrictions on the provision of games during late-night hours are intended to guarantee the right of youth to sleep, as recommended by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.”
However, the right to sleep is ultimately limited to students who study late into the night and young people who watch TV and listen to the radio. This means that the right to sleep is ultimately a matter that can be decided by the individual young person. Protecting a right that can be guaranteed by such individual decisions by blocking games can only be interpreted as an infringement of freedom.
Furthermore, considering the leisure environment of young people in Korea, it is clear that this system significantly infringes on their freedom. In terms of time, due to excessive enthusiasm for education in Korea, the leisure activities that young people can enjoy are very limited. In addition, amid development-oriented economic policies, the infrastructure for young people’s leisure activities is quite poor. In this environment, games can be considered one of the few leisure activities available to youth. If even these leisure activities are partially restricted by law, it significantly infringes on the right of youth to pursue happiness.

Background of the introduction of the shutdown system and the need for an educational approach

The shutdown system was introduced with the intention of solving the problem of youth addiction to games. Game addiction is clearly recognized as a serious social problem and can have a negative impact on the health and academic achievement of youth. However, an educational approach may be more effective than legal sanctions in solving this problem. Educational programs are needed to make youth fully aware of the dangers of game addiction and to help them develop healthy gaming habits. It is also important for parents and teachers to work together to manage and guide youth’s game use.

Conclusion

As argued above, the shutdown system, which is inefficient and violates the human rights of young people, should no longer exist. If the goal is to protect young people from game addiction, more fundamental measures to address the problem of game addiction must be proposed. Given that there is a clear difference between the illegality of drugs and games, completely blocking their use, as is done with drugs, would be nothing more than a superficial measure.
In order to prevent game addiction, it is necessary to promote educational measures to make young people fully aware of the dangers of game addiction and to provide them with leisure activities other than games. In addition, various programs and policies should be established to help young people develop healthy gaming habits. Through these measures, young people should be supported in enjoying games autonomously while maintaining a healthy lifestyle.