International Law

Tough New Rules in China for Computer Games - Part II

By Stan

Some additional information on this topic, which I posted on yesterday. From China Tech News:

The General Administration of Press and Publication of China will soon fix a new measure to regulate the cooperation between Chinese and foreign online games service providers and the new measure may focus on punishing foreign game operators who adopt arbitrary rules during the cooperation with their Chinese partners.

According to news on Sina.com, GAPP will hold a seminar featuring attendance of top game executives on March 18 when it will announce a range of new measures.

GAPP says that foreign companies in China must comply with China’s laws and regulations. To protect Chinese companies’ rights, concerned departments have rolled out these measures with the purpose of creating a fair environment for online game operations. Under the new measure, if a foreign game operator is involved in a lawsuit as a result of their unfair clauses against their Chinese partners, their game products may be suspended in China.

OK, this part is not new but was announced late last year. I was wondering at the time what it all meant and how the new policy stance would be implemented. I guess we’re still waiting on details, but it sounds like the agencies involved have been moving ahead.

In addition, GAPP will strengthen the approval procedure for online games, which is believed to be a heightening of threshold for foreign games to enter the Chinese market, though Kou Xiaowei, deputy chief of sci-tech and digital publishing department under GAPP, stressed that GAPP would treat both Chinese and foreign game service providers equally without discrimination during the approval process.

This is what I was talking about yesterday, and it appears to be a heightened level of scrutiny for new games. Moreover, as I also mentioned yesterday, the protectionist rhetoric is a bit more toned down than what initial reports suggested. While this still seems like protectionism to me, the “no discrimination” caveat offers at least some wiggle room for officials if they are challenged on this policy.

Once again, best to keep an eye on this and see where it goes.

© Stan for China Hearsay, 2009. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us

Full post as published by China Hearsay on March 17, 2009 (boomark / email).