This blog post examines from various perspectives whether the Shutdown System actually contributes to youth protection or instead causes unnecessary regulation and side effects.
When you think of Cinderella, images like glass slippers and a pumpkin carriage come to mind, but the most memorable scene is likely the moment the magic wears off at midnight and Cinderella leaves the ballroom. Not long ago, the search term ‘Cinderella Law’ topped the real-time trending search rankings on an internet portal site and remained there for some time. While the familiar fairy tale title sparked curiosity about its connection to law, the law itself has generated significant controversy. The Cinderella Law refers to the direct shutdown system currently enforced in South Korea, which restricts online game access for minors under 16 during the late-night hours from midnight to 6 a.m. The nickname “Cinderella Law” originated because the 12 AM cutoff resembles Cinderella losing her magic after midnight and being unable to enjoy the ball. However, due to several problems with this law, there is opposition to the implementation of the direct shutdown system.
The Shutdown System is a regulation that limits game access under the premise of protecting minors from problems arising from gaming, such as internet addiction, increased violence, and lack of social skills, while promoting their right to sleep and study. This system was first proposed in 2004 at the ‘Forum for Preparing Measures to Secure Youth Sleep Rights’ to guarantee adolescents’ right to sleep. Legislative attempts began in 2005 with the introduction of the ‘Partial Amendment Bill to the Youth Protection Act’. However, due to significant opposition, it failed to pass into law until 2011, when it was finally enacted as the ‘Amended Youth Protection Act’. It took effect on November 20, 2011, and after an educational period, full enforcement began in 2012.
Originally, the shutdown system comprised three types: indirect shutdown, selective shutdown, and direct shutdown. First, the indirect shutdown system reduces game usage by offering incentives. It either withholds benefits like experience points or in-game currency if a player plays for more than a set time, or grants benefits if a player refrains from playing for a certain period. Second, the selective shutdown system allows parents to request that game companies disclose their children’s game usage history and restrict play to specific times. Third, the direct shutdown system prohibits game use between midnight and 6 AM, regardless of the youth’s will. The currently implemented system is this direct shutdown system, which faces several problems: the law’s effectiveness, discrimination and ambiguity arising from the regulatory method, infringement on youth’s human rights, and damage to the game industry.
First, the logic behind the direct shutdown system’s approach to reducing game addiction is flawed, making it ineffective at regulating actual addiction. Supporters argue that since adolescents heavily use the internet at night, regulating this usage can reduce addiction and protect their right to health. The table below, used by the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family to advocate for the shutdown system, shows data on adolescents’ primary internet usage times. Statistical data reveals that adolescents aged 15 to 19 use the internet six times more frequently between 10 PM and 2 AM than those aged 9 to 14. This led to the claim that adolescents suffer more severe addiction than younger children and, furthermore, that their right to sleep is being infringed upon.
However, internet addiction stems from prolonged gaming sessions, not the specific time of day games are played. For example, playing extensively from 6 PM to midnight is problematic, whereas playing from midnight to 12:30 AM is not inherently problematic. Furthermore, the reason adolescents aged 15 to 19 use the internet heavily between 10 PM and 2 AM is primarily because most high school students finish their nighttime self-study sessions at 10 PM. Therefore, the argument that the high number of internet addicts leads to heavy nighttime gaming does not hold up. Implementing laws without understanding the fundamental causes of game addiction or even what game addiction precisely entails resulted in the creation of a futile system that simply regulates nighttime gaming. Furthermore, while statistical data presented combined figures for 10 PM to 2 AM, it failed to provide separate data for the restricted period of midnight to 6 AM. This is a loophole-exploiting tactic. The period should be clearly divided into 10 PM to midnight and midnight to 2 AM. If the actual number of gamers playing after midnight is low, the effectiveness of the shutdown system is questionable.
Second, there are problems stemming from the inherent flaws in the direct shutdown system itself. The method for identifying minors relies on the resident registration number registered to the account. This creates a loophole where minors can simply use their parents’ or another adult’s resident registration number. Furthermore, because the regulation is enforced via the resident registration number, it cannot be applied to games that do not require its use. The gaming industry has already exploited this by offering games that allow sign-up using only an email address. For example, Hangame has allowed sign-up with just an email address for games without age restrictions since 2005, and NCSoft also changed its game portal, PlayNC, to allow membership sign-up with only email verification. This situation is similar to YouTube’s workaround for the internet real-name system implemented in 2009. When YouTube was required to implement the real-name system, Google blocked video uploads from Korean accounts. However, since IP addresses weren’t blocked, users could upload videos by changing their country setting in their account preferences. The shutdown system’s regulations can similarly be circumvented in this manner.
Such loopholes not only pose efficiency issues but also encourage negative behaviors like identity theft. By making it possible for minors to use another adult’s resident registration number during late-night hours, it instills the mistaken belief that ‘identity theft is necessary to play games,’ thereby encouraging illegal activity. A survey of 600 students in the ‘Survey on the Actual Status of the Youth Internet Game Healthy Use System’ revealed that 9% of students used an adult’s resident registration number to play games late at night. Among these, 40% created an ID without parental permission to access games. Furthermore, cases of using the resident registration number of someone outside the family have also increased. Despite this identity theft constituting a criminal offense punishable by imprisonment under the Resident Registration Act, 40% of students playing late at night are committing identity theft. Youth perceive this as ‘no big deal’ or ‘something acceptable to do just to play games.’ The direct shutdown system is making youth view illegal acts as insignificant and is increasing them.
Third, the direct shutdown system infringed upon youth autonomy during its implementation. According to Article 5, Paragraph 2 of the Framework Act on Youth, the state and local governments must involve youth in advisory and deliberative procedures for youth-related policies or gather their opinions to ensure they can smoothly access relevant information and express their views. It is an established fact that the shutdown system is a youth-related policy. Therefore, youth participation should naturally have been ensured during the law’s enactment. However, only consultations occurred between the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family and the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, while youth autonomy was not guaranteed. This violates the Basic Act even before the Youth Protection Act, and it is unacceptable for a law intended for youth to be forcibly enforced without their participation.
Fourth, the regulatory approach of the shutdown system infringes upon the rights of game companies. Proponents of the law argue that restricting game companies’ operating hours is no different from limiting the business hours of institutions like academies or PC bangs, and thus poses no problem. However, according to the principle of proportionality, this requires evaluation to determine if it is as reasonable as academy regulations when considering the legitimacy of the purpose, the minimal infringement, and the balance of legal interests. Without such evaluation, it infringes upon game companies’ freedom to conduct their business. Furthermore, the shutdown system infringes upon the equality rights of game companies. Not all games are regulated; console games and packaged games without network functionality are exempt, while smartphones and tablet computers received a two-year grace period. Moreover, despite being online games, Korean game companies are subject to regulation, while foreign game companies are exempt. To justify such differences in the scope of regulation, online games would need to be significantly more addictive than non-network games, yet no evidence supports this claim. Furthermore, imposing regulations solely on Korean companies implies that games made by Korean companies must be dramatically more addictive, but again, no evidence exists for this. Therefore, imposing regulations as currently done constitutes discrimination against companies and violates their right to equality. The real reason regulations target only Korean games, especially those providing network services, is the lack of means to regulate other games. For example, when regulations were initially demanded for StarCraft, Blizzard Software stated it would block all IP addresses after midnight, not just those of minors, leading to the withdrawal of the regulations. Forcing implementation when the system isn’t prepared and the enforcement itself is unrealistic is wrong.
While the nickname “Cinderella Law” evokes a positive image of a virtuous protagonist and a happy ending, the shutdown system—implemented without thorough preparation or even a proper regulatory method, and enforced without considering youth opinions—is being showered with fierce criticism and opposition, much like the original meaning of Cinderella, “the ragged girl.” For the shutdown system to properly fulfill its original purpose of protecting youth and achieve a happy ending, changes to the current system are inevitable.
