Talk:Irish Film Classification Office

Older posts

Can anyone comfirm that the IFCO never rated games? I recall seeing IFCO 18 rating stickers stuck over the BBFC ratings on a certain game (probably one of the Grand Theft Auto games), but I suppose it is possible that they were just stuck on them by the retailers or distributors to make them look like legally-binding ratings.

Also, how long have IFCO ratings been around on home video formats? I seem to not recall seeing them on any tapes until the mid-90s - before that I just remember BBFC ratings. This does raise the question of how local productions (such as RTÉ videos) were rated... --Zilog Jones 01:38, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Video Recordings Act 1989 gave IFCO power over video tapes - before that BBFC ratings were on tapes here. Presumably RTÉ videos would also (and continue to be) have been BBFC rated, or they couldn't be sold in NI. --Rdd 20:30, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The principal legislation in the UK[1] allows a number of exemptions apparently ("2. Exempted works"), could be worth checking. Djegan 23:28, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to GAME head office, and IFCO, GAME took 'spare' stickers off the DVD's they used to sell and put them over the BBFC stickers to give the staff more power to try and stop kids buying games. However, they were breaking the law... --Kiand 07:20, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I think (well actually I KNOW, I'm just trying not to sound like a know-it-all) that the shops are either too stupid or too lazy to use PEGI stickers. For instance the game Destroy All Humans was rated by BBFC as 15 and by PEGI as 12+ and you can confirm Ireland's rating is the PEGI one, yet I've seen (in more than one shop) them not just using an IFCO label, but using a 15 IFCO label. Although, now that the BBFC seem to rating nearly all new games, I think some shops have copped on to using the right ones (I saw a HMV in Dublin with a game relabeled with a PEGI cert.) - Gerbon689 09:59, 12 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

But PEGI ratings aren't legally binding in Ireland, IIRC. Either way, its irrelevant to me, as my days of needing to challenge managers about 15/18's games are gone; although I will still refuse ID if its asked for.... --Kiand 11:50, 12 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move. —Nightst a llion (?) 09:43, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Move

Since when you head to ifco.ie you are presented with the title "Irish Film Censor's Office", and the logo reads "IFCO", coupled with the facts that government agencies in Ireland have English as well as Irish names and that this is en:, I propose moving this article to an English title that reflects its official name in English, either Film Censor's Office or Irish Film Censor's Office. This is per WP:UE and WP:IMOS. 22:58, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

I support this, as even if the current Irish title is the official name, this is the English-language Wikipedia. --Kiand 02:54, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Use English; consensus on practice. Septentrionalis 04:09, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support, see also Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Ireland-related articles); I support Irish Film Censor's Office of course (per the official website) --Francis Schonken 11:52, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support a move to Official Censor of Films (the only official name in accordance with the law) or Film Censor's Office (as a compromise) used in statutory instruments; but not Irish Film Censor's Office - we should be reserved in moving articles to names that start "Irish..." unless it is official or compromise solution. It is also notable that the office has never being offically granted an Irish name in law in any case, but rather a matter of convention. Djegan 14:09, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Irish Film Censor's Office is what's on their website, and what their logo refers to, so I appended my vote above to make clear what I think to be logical. I can't follow Djegan's playing around with the terms "official" and "in accordance with the law": what Djegan says is something like "Oifig Scrúdóir na Scannán" is in no way official, and because of that reason we should translate it to English, and use that as the official name. Sorry, the organisation has an English name (as in wikipedia:naming conventions (common names)), regardless of its statute w.r.t. the Law of the Republic of Ireland --Francis Schonken 16:50, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Maybe you have misunderstood me (my comments can be complicatedly worded), the law which gives the name is Censorship of Films Act, 1923 (Section 1) and has not being amended in so far as it relates to the name, it only gives an English language name and their has never being an official corresponding Irish language name. In so far as "Irish Film Censor's Office" is concerned this can be compared to other misinformed titles like "Irish Republic", "Irish police" and "Irish Prime Minister" - it might have some sanction (and be quite common) but is simply incorrect. But lets not get personal about it. Djegan 17:07, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - My comments make it clear above that Film Censor's Office is an acceptable compromise to other solutions. This is used on all certificates of the office[2][3] that a video must carry within the Republic of Ireland and this must count for something as their are potentially hundredths of thousands. Djegan 17:21, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - Website says Irish Film Censor's Office, logo reads IFCO, quote on front page from the current Film Censor says IFCO, website address is http://www.ifco.ie/, and textual references include the word "Irish". I'd say that's more than enough to suggest that including "Irish" in the title shouldn't be ruled out entirely. Similarly, in English law, there are countless references to the Police of the Metropolis, but that's not where our article is, and equally not where it should be. Having looked a little into the matter, it appears that "Official Censor of Films" is the title of the person in charge of the Office. I object to the suggestion that prepending "Irish" to the title is in any way improper. 19:31, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
      - I am not saying using "Irish" is improper, only that if we use it then it should be only using it if its part of the official or common name - not a defacto disambiguation tack-on. "Irish Film Censor's Office" is some corporate rebranding scheme gone wrong and is a very recent change. Djegan 20:24, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        It is corporate rebranding gone wrong in your opinion. Evidently, "Irish" is a part of the official name in English, otherwise the above references simply would not be. ;-) 00:24, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
        As confirmed by the above references I supplied as late as 1996 it was officially refered to as "Film Censor's Office". Djegan 00:37, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        ... and as confirmed by above evidence as late as 2006, it is officially referred to as the "Irish Film Censor's Office". I note at this point that everyone else in this discussion appears to agree with this. 09:08, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Ratings on Video Games

Would I be correct in assuming that shops do actually have the right to enforce PEGI ratings when selling? The article currently makes it sound like they're not even allowed to if they want. But are they? I think they are. Someone know forsure? - ^Red _Hot 08:39, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No. Only under the standard "right to reserve admission" rules. Most of them back down extremely quickly when you mention age discrimination. --Kiand 09:13, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. It's never come up for me, although I have attempted to buy games above my age, they've never tried to stop me. Same with DVDs; when I was 12 (yes I'm not exaggerating) I managed to buy a 15 DVD in Golden Discs, no questions asked, so I'm not too surprised they'd back down. - ^Red _Hot 08:33, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It wouldn't qualify as age discrimination, as the Equal Status Act says discrimination on the age ground doesn't count if you are discriminating in favour of or against someone under 18. 193.95.165.190 14:52, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replying to your PEGI isn't legally binding comment higher up the page, Kiand.

PEGI ratings don't have statute law enforcement backing in Southern Ireland, that's true, but one of the men in IFCO, Ger Connolly, I think, is the representative from the State on the PEGI board, so the PEGI system does have some sort of "Official approval" from the State.

Not all systems need to have the threat of statutory enforcement to be legitimate or just to work as intended. Arguably, the unofficial system of using the BBFC video certificates which was what rental & retail shops used all the way through the 80's until the 1st of September 1993 was more illegitimate than the PEGI system which has been designed on a pan-european basis to include Southern Ireland.

There is a debate now in the UK about either giving the BBFC purview over games or of giving the PEGI ratings statutory backing. Perhaps the government in the South will give the PEGI ratings statutory backing at some point. Given that the censor has banned Manhunt 2, a ban which has been overturned in the UK, I'd prefer PEGI to have control than Kelleher.

Respect due for refusing to prove your age, Kiand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.202.152.174 (talk) 17:13, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation

Is there any way to redo the linking so that one searching for another IFCO isn't automatically sent here without having the option of going to a disambiguation page? Even just a link at the top of the article like other ones. It's kind of annoying to actually have to search and find it through obscure means. 216.191.40.149 19:15, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

12RA

so is this "no longer used", or is it "not to be confused with an obsolete certificate, as it is still issued."? There is an inconsistency in the article Farannan 05:39, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's no longer used. 193.95.165.190 14:51, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Name revisited

Well, the argument should be solved now. The office of Official Censor of Films, trading as the Irish Film Censor's Office, has been renamed legally to the Irish Film Classification Office under the newly commenced Civil Law (Miscellanious Provisions) Act 2008. So the trading name and the legal name are now the same. --Rdd (talk) 18:58, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Relationship with BBFC" section

I am striking out the section entitled "Relationship with the BBFC" as the section does not describe the relationship (if any) between the BBFC and the IFCO, and instead amounts to little more then an observation that the packaging of English language Region 2 videos sometimes has the UK and Irish certificates alongside each other, while at other times the Irish certificate will be a sticker placed over the BBFC rating logo. The only referenced point in the section is a memo from the BBFC's website regarding the labeling of videos available for sale in the UK which points out that videos on sale in the UK should not carry an Irish certificate alongside a British one where the Irish rating permits supply to those of a lower age then the British one. This point is not relevant to Ireland or the IFCO, and consequently the section belongs on the BBFC wiki page (but it is such a minor point I doubt it warrants inclusion there either). Rubensni (talk) 16:35, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Others

What is the Ireland rating for the Nicole Kidman movie The Others? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:0:8500:472:8511:1939:4FB5:500 (talk) 20:30, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

15 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.3.43.15 (talk) 22:28, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reason for introduction of 16 certificate

I have a recollection of reading, years ago in this article, about the reason for the introduction of the 16 certificate and the re branding of 12PG and 15PG to 12A and 15A. Apparently the film Bad Santa received complaints from parents, unaware of the film's adult content, who brought their children to see the film which was rated 15PG in cinemas. When I recently rented the film on Blu-ray I found the Irish 18 logo on the disc. I still feel this information is relevant to the article if it caused IFCO to review the cinema certificates. A similar discussion has appeared on the talk page to the Bad Santa article but the (currently) sole contributor is having problems finding reliable sources to this. Tk420 (talk) 20:31, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I now also seem to recall reading that most of the complaints about the rating of Bad Santa were made to cinemas and talk shows while IFCO only received two complaints.Tk420 (talk) 11:21, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Irish Film Classification Office. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:53, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]