lat-puzz.com

by **markobr** » Sat Jan 09, 2021 8:43 pm

A government agency that usually aims to limit the availability of certain things was almost (and, in fact, still might be) forced to enhance it.

by **JenBurdoo** » Sat Jan 09, 2021 10:17 pm

Is this a national agency? State/provincial? Local?

In the United States? Europe? Elsewhere?

Is the limit due to a safety issue? Do circumstances relevantly change? Are the things bigger than a breadbox?

Are the items purchasable? Do they require a permit? Can anyone get one, or are they limited to a category of people? Are they found singly? Must they be assembled? Are they hazardous? Are they edible?

by **markobr** » Sat Jan 09, 2021 10:57 pm

Is this a national agency? This. State/provincial? Local?

In the United States? Europe? This. Elsewhere?

Is the limit due to a safety issue? No. Do circumstances relevantly change? One circumstance changed, but not very recently. Are the things bigger than a breadbox? Few of them.

Are the items purchasable? Some are, some are not. Do they require a permit? No. Can anyone get one, No, at least not legally. or are they limited to a category of people? So they are.. Are they found singly? They can be. Must they be assembled? No. Are they hazardous? DOYD of hazardous. Are they edible? No.

by **hominid** » Sun Jan 10, 2021 7:00 pm

Are they restricted by age? Did the restriction change at any point?

Europe: a specific country? LTPF list of European countries?

by **markobr** » Sun Jan 10, 2021 7:33 pm

Are they restricted by age? Yes, this is the main restriction. Did the restriction change at any point? Not relevantly.

Europe: a specific country? Yes. LTPF list of European countries? Germany.

by **JenBurdoo** » Sun Jan 10, 2021 7:44 pm

Tobacco? Alcohol? Some particular drug? A civic right or duty?

by **markobr** » Sun Jan 10, 2021 8:18 pm

Tobacco? Alcohol? Some particular drug? A civic right or duty? No to all.

by **biograd** » Mon Jan 11, 2021 5:43 pm

Are they films? video/computer games? some other creative work?

by **markobr** » Mon Jan 11, 2021 6:18 pm

Are they films? Yes. video/computer games? Yes, but probably less relevantly. some other creative work? Yes.

by **GalFisk** » Tue Jan 12, 2021 7:47 am

Works: visual? Auditory? Solid? Tactile? Copyright relevant? Copying? Libraries? Museums? were they supposed to limit a legal activity? Illegal activity? Black markets relevant?

by **markobr** » Tue Jan 12, 2021 7:36 pm

Works: visual? Yes. Auditory? Yes. Solid? You mean sculptures and the like? Not usually. Tactile? Not usually. Copyright relevant? No. Copying? Yesish. Libraries? They can be somewhat affected. Museums? They could be somewhat affected, but this would be very unusual. were they supposed to limit a legal activity? Yesish. Illegal activity? Yope. Black markets relevant? Not much.

by **JenBurdoo** » Wed Jan 13, 2021 8:50 pm

If materials could be edited to make them suitable for different age groups, would this enhancement be required?

X-rated material relevant? All age groups/classes, or just one?

by **Mimino** » Thu Jan 14, 2021 8:14 pm

Did they reduce the rating of movies? changed their rating policy?
forced by: law courts? tv stations? the movie industry? politicians? mass media?
the opinion "restrictive rating = censorship" relevant?
Is a particular type of movies relevant? one particular movie?
Relevant that most cinemas are closed at the moment?

Would it help to investigate into the puzzle title .. ? what is in the acts/proceedings must also be in the world?
Is the argument that a movie should not be X rated if it shows the same stuff that is every day presented before criminal courts?

by **markobr** » Thu Jan 14, 2021 9:52 pm

If materials could be edited to make them suitable for different age groups, would this enhancement be required? No.

X-rated material relevant? OTRT, but it's not exactly parental rating (which wouldn't be done by a government agency). All age groups/classes, or just one? So, FA.

Did they reduce the rating of movies? No. changed their rating policy? No.
forced by: law courts? Yes. tv stations? the movie industry? politicians? mass media? No to rest.
the opinion "restrictive rating = censorship" relevant? No.
Is a particular type of movies relevant? Yesish. one particular movie? Immediately yes, but could become relevant for other works, too.
Relevant that most cinemas are closed at the moment? No.

Would it help to investigate into the puzzle title .. ? Yes. what is in the acts/proceedings must also be in the world? Yes.
Is the argument that a movie should not be X rated if it shows the same stuff that is every day presented before criminal courts? No.

by **Mimino** » Thu Jan 14, 2021 10:20 pm

The type of movies: comedies?
Was the case for this one movie taken to the courts by: the producer/sponsor? actors? other people involved in the making? cinema owners? parents? NPOs?
Was the argument before the court related to the movie at all? to its content? its style? nudity? violence? language?
DId the movie title contain a swearword?

by **markobr** » Fri Jan 15, 2021 1:43 am

he type of movies: comedies? No.
Was the case for this one movie taken to the courts by: the producer/sponsor? actors? other people involved in the making? cinema owners? parents? NPOs? None of these, possibly FA.
Was the argument before the court related to the movie at all? At all: Yes. But in fact not so much. to its content? Yes, but not much. its style? No. nudity? violence? These are part of what the agency generally cares about, less relevant for the argument language? Usually not something the agency cares about.
DId the movie title contain a swearword? Irrelevant.

by **Mimino** » Tue Jan 19, 2021 11:30 am

type of movies: documentaries? propaganda movies?
was the case before the courts at all? did
anyone take legal action against (or in favor?) of limiting the circulation of this movie?
intellectual property relevant? privacy? brands/trade marks? secret information?

by **markobr** » Tue Jan 19, 2021 4:00 pm

type of movies: documentaries? No. propaganda movies? One of the relevant types.
was the case before the courts at all? Yes. did
anyone take legal action against (or in favor?) of limiting the circulation of this movie? Yope. ("in favor": No.)
intellectual property relevant? Noish. privacy? No. brands/trade marks? No. secret information? Yope.

by **Mimino** » Fri Jan 22, 2021 4:41 pm

Is the purpose of this government agency: to limit the circulation of certain movies? to control who has access to these movies? to control public broadcasting or display of movies? to prevent illegal copying? to collect taxes? to defend intellectual property? to protect the rights of movie makers or authors?
Was legal action taken by: another government agency? an EU agency? an international organization? private organization(s)? individuals? politicians?
German propaganda movies relevant? from the Nazi era?

by **markobr** » Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:23 pm

Is the purpose of this government agency: to limit the circulation of certain movies? Yes. to control who has access to these movies? Yes. to control public broadcasting or display of movies? Yes. to prevent illegal copying? No. to collect taxes? No. to defend intellectual property? No. to protect the rights of movie makers or authors? No.
Was legal action taken by: another government agency? an EU agency? an international organization? private organization(s)? individuals? This. One individual, in fact. politicians? No.
German propaganda movies relevant? Among other media. from the Nazi era? Possibly, but this would be unusual.

by **JenBurdoo** » Mon Jan 25, 2021 2:39 am

From the Communist era? The modern era? The Weimar era? Era relevant at all?

Are the media limited by this agency at the time they are made? Shown? Are they shown years or decades later after being made or initially shown?

Is the individual trying to promote these media? Save them? Research them?

by **Mimino** » Mon Jan 25, 2021 11:49 am

Struggling with the term "government agency" .. is this some sort of film censorship agency? Does this happen in modern times? relevant in which country?
About this individual who went to court about that one movie: does he have any specific link to the movie? does the movie feature himself/relatives/friends, events from their life, well-known events from the person's home region, the person's house or other places relevant to him?
Is his argument along the lines "this movie shows the truth about .. and the world has a right to know that"?

by **markobr** » Fri Jan 29, 2021 1:14 am

From the Communist era? Not very probable. The modern era? If you mean contemporary stuff: Yes, more probable. The Weimar era? Very probably not. Era relevant at all? Not much. The agency usually deals with recent media, the media with access in question tend to be somewhat older. Note that propaganda media are only part of the agency's targets, and maybe not the most relevant one.

Are the media limited by this agency at the time they are made? No. Shown? Yes, or otherwise made public. Are they shown years or decades later after being made or initially shown? Possibly, but not usually.

Is the individual trying to promote these media? No. Save them? Possibly. But probably not. Research them? Possibly. But probably not.

Struggling with the term "government agency" .. is this some sort of film censorship agency? Not censorship in a strict sense, they don't act before something is published. But they restrict the circulation of media. Does this happen in modern times? Yes. 2014-2016, could go on any day. relevant in which country? Germany.
About this individual who went to court about that one movie: does he have any specific link to the movie? Yope. does the movie feature himself/relatives/friends, events from their life, well-known events from the person's home region, the person's house or other places relevant to him? No. Is his argument along the lines "this movie shows the truth about .. and the world has a right to know that"? No.

by **Mimino** » Fri Jan 29, 2021 4:44 pm

Was the movie in question intended to be shown for educational purposes? (i.e. in a cinema or drama class?)
Would it help to find out the exact movie? was it a famous one?

by **markobr** » Fri Jan 29, 2021 8:33 pm

Was the movie in question intended to be shown for educational purposes? (i.e. in a cinema or drama class?) Probably not, assume no.
Would it help to find out the exact movie? No. I don't even know the title. was it a famous one? No.

by **Mimino** » Mon Feb 01, 2021 5:22 pm

Now I'm completely lost. Trying a recap.
A government agency is responsible for monitoring/limiting the circulation of movies?
They check published movies and rate them as appropriate for a particular audience? (like children-friendly, parental guidance advised, ..)
They make sure that cinemas and tv stations follow these rules?
One person went to court? against this agency? with respect to a particular movie?
Was the person not satisified with the rating of the movie?
Was the movie just a vehicle for a more general point he wanted to make? like that there should not be a rating at all? that it should be voluntarily? that cinemas should not enforce, just inform about the rating?

by **markobr** » Mon Feb 01, 2021 5:53 pm

Now I'm completely lost. Trying a recap.

A government agency is responsible for monitoring/limiting the circulation of movies? Yes, and other media.
They check published movies and rate them as appropriate for a particular audience? (like children-friendly, parental guidance advised, ..) No, not exactly. In fact they only "rate" certain media as inappropriate, and this is more than advice.
They make sure that cinemas and tv stations follow these rules? This would be done by other agencies, but basically yes. Cinemas and TV stations are among those who would have to follow the rules.
One person went to court? Yes. against this agency? Yes. with respect to a particular movie? Yes.
Was the person not satisified with the rating of the movie? No, the person was ok with that.
Was the movie just a vehicle for a more general point he wanted to make? No. Making a point was, if at all, only one of several motives. like that there should not be a rating at all? that it should be voluntarily? that cinemas should not enforce, just inform about the rating? For all questions: Possibly, but probably not. He sure also has quite a different motive.

by **Sundowner** » Mon Feb 01, 2021 6:32 pm

Was the person a movie critic? Was the question whether it is legal to write a review of a banned movie?

by **markobr** » Mon Feb 01, 2021 7:34 pm

Was the person a movie critic? There is a slight possibility that he relevantly was one, but probably not. Was the question whether it is legal to write a review of a banned movie? No.

by **Mimino** » Mon Feb 01, 2021 11:01 pm

Was the movie in question restricted? Did the man want to change that?
Advertising relevant? Did the man use the fact that the movie was banned for minors to advertise it to adults?

by **Sundowner** » Mon Feb 01, 2021 11:58 pm

Was the question whether it is legal to discuss the content of a banned movie in a blog? in a forum? in a place where minors have access to? so that they could become interested in the movie of which they otherwise would not even know? Is it illegal to even publicly mention banned movies? to compile a list of banned movies and publish it?

by **markobr** » Tue Feb 02, 2021 9:57 pm

Was the movie in question restricted? Yes. Did the man want to change that? Noish.
Advertising relevant? No. Did the man use the fact that the movie was banned for minors to advertise it to adults? No.

Was the question whether it is legal to discuss the content of a banned movie in a blog? No. in a forum? No. in a place where minors have access to? No. so that they could become interested in the movie of which they otherwise would not even know? No. Is it illegal to even publicly mention banned movies? No (advertising in a place accessible to minors would be illegal, all of this is irrelevant). to compile a list of banned movies and publish it? No, in fact the agency publishes something similar.

by **gregoryuconn** » Wed Feb 03, 2021 2:39 am

Holocaust denial laws relevant? Swastika bans? Other laws banning certain aspects of Nazi ideology? Springtime for Hitler relevant at all?

by **Sundowner** » Wed Feb 03, 2021 12:10 pm

Was the man's main motive financial? commercial? did he want to get a compensation? did he want to improve his business? was the movie related to the man's occupation? is the man's occupation related to movies? to media?
The puzzle statement reads "the agency was almost enforced to enhance the availability of something" .. the availability of movies? of restricted movies? of information about these movies? of information about their (the agency's) way of working? of information about their decision criteria?
Would "enhancing the availability" mean that the agency actively should do something? stop doing something? stop preventing others from doing something? actively encourage others to do something?

by **markobr** » Wed Feb 03, 2021 6:52 pm

Holocaust denial laws relevant? No. Note that this is not about things completely banned but about restrictions with respect to minors. Swastika bans? No. Other laws banning certain aspects of Nazi ideology? No. Springtime for Hitler relevant at all? No.

Was the man's main motive financial? commercial? did he want to get a compensation? did he want to improve his business? No to all. was the movie related to the man's occupation? is the man's occupation related to movies? to media? No, or irrelevant.
The puzzle statement reads "the agency was almost enforced to enhance the availability of something" .. the availability of movies? Not in general. of restricted movies? Yes. of information about these movies? This, too. In fact, the agency has very relevantly been forced to do that, although I don't know whwther this had any practical effects. of information about their (the agency's) way of working? Again, this, too, don't know about the practical effects. of information about their decision criteria? This could be an example of the kind of information from the former question.
Would "enhancing the availability" mean that the agency actively should do something? Yes! stop doing something? No. stop preventing others from doing something? No. actively encourage others to do something? No.

As to a possible FA: While propaganda is part of the agency's field of activity, it is not the only one and probably not even the most common one. The movie in question was not a propaganda movie, although the case might have implications for propaganda media, too.

by **Sundowner** » Wed Feb 03, 2021 7:21 pm

Search engines relevant? Search engine filtering?

by **markobr** » Wed Feb 03, 2021 8:42 pm

Search engines relevant? Search engine filtering? No.

by **biograd** » Thu Feb 04, 2021 7:54 am

Are they legally mandated to increase the availability of the films/media specifically to people of an age that would normally be prohibited from obtaining them? or to older people? or to everyone?

by **markobr** » Fri Feb 05, 2021 8:07 pm

Are they legally mandated to increase the availability of the films/media specifically to people of an age that would normally be prohibited from obtaining them? No. or to older people? Yes (at least almost), or to everyone? So, no.

by **biograd** » Fri Feb 05, 2021 11:45 pm

Is the reason for the agency to make the films available to people of age that then those people (e.g. parents) can judge the content of the films for themselves before potentially showing them to underage people?

by **markobr** » Sat Feb 06, 2021 7:09 pm

Is the reason for the agency to make the films available to people of age that then those people (e.g. parents) can judge the content of the films for themselves before potentially showing them to underage people? No.

by **Mimino** » Mon Feb 08, 2021 2:25 pm

So the agency is legally requested to actively do something that makes movies that are banned for minors better available to adult people? Is that right?
Is it one specific action they have to take?
Does it involve the broadcasting of these movies in cinemas? on tv? on media streaming? the sale of DVDs?
Age verification rules/methods relevant?

by **markobr** » Mon Feb 08, 2021 5:24 pm

So the agency is legally requested to actively do something that makes movies that are banned for minors better available to adult people? Is that right? Yes. But beware of FAs.
Is it one specific action they have to take? Not necessarily.
Does it involve the broadcasting of these movies A special No to "broadcasting". in cinemas? Not really, but, in a sense... on tv? No. on media streaming? No. the sale of DVDs? Yope.
Age verification rules/methods relevant? No.

by **Mimino** » Wed Feb 10, 2021 1:36 pm

Could the action(s) the agency had to take be described as removing barriers for adults who want to access restricted movies?
Relevant that in places where DVDs are sold restricted movies have to be placed in a separate room? Is this no longer required?
Accessibility laws relevant? Do places where restricted movies are sold or shown have to be wheelchair accessible?

by **markobr** » Sat Feb 13, 2021 12:00 am

Could the action(s) the agency had to take be described as removing barriers for adults who want to access restricted movies? No, something even more active.
Relevant that in places where DVDs are sold restricted movies have to be placed in a separate room? No. Is this no longer required? Irrelevant.
Accessibility laws relevant? No. Do places where restricted movies are sold or shown have to be wheelchair accessible? Irrelevant.

by **Mimino** » Mon Feb 15, 2021 2:12 pm

Do they have to distribute the movies on request? to make sure that enough copies are available? RPC codes relevant?
Is there a specific way of access they have to care about? if neither broadcasting nor media streaming, yopeishly DVD and cinema only in a sense .. is there one way of access not yet mentioned so far? or are all equally relevant?

by **markobr** » Wed Feb 17, 2021 10:04 pm

Do they have to distribute the movies on request? Yesish (up to now almost) to make sure that enough copies are available? Noish. RPC codes relevant? No.
Is there a specific way of access they have to care about? Several ways, all of them yesishly or yopeishly if neither broadcasting nor media streaming, yopeishly DVD and cinema only in a sense .. is there one way of access not yet mentioned so far? No specific one. or are all equally relevant? This is close, although some more than others, and broadcasting is clearly irrelevant.

by **Sundowner** » Thu Feb 18, 2021 10:13 am

I got somewhat stuck here, I can't imagine that distributing movies belongs to the business of this agency, if it is the one I'm thinking of.

Do they have to sell these movies? have them available for sale?
Do they have to sell their inspection/review copies have upon request?
Freedom of speech/freedom of expression relevant?

by **markobr** » Thu Feb 18, 2021 10:14 pm

I got somewhat stuck here, I can't imagine that distributing movies belongs to the business of this agency, if it is the one I'm thinking of. Nor did the people running the agency, that's why it went to court.

Do they have to sell these movies? Technically no, but maybe something similar. have them available for sale? No, but...
Do they have to sell their inspection/review copies have upon request? Not sell these copies, but...
Freedom of speech/freedom of expression relevant? No, another freedom. May be simply a mistake in finding the right word.

by **Sundowner** » Mon Mar 22, 2021 5:24 pm

Freedom of art?
Freedom of profession?
Freedom of property?
Do they simply have to return the inspection copies?

by **markobr** » Fri Mar 26, 2021 12:02 am

Freedom of art? No.
Freedom of profession? No.
Freedom of property? No.
Do they simply have to return the inspection copies? No, but the inspection copies are very relevant. Freedom of...

by **GalFisk** » Fri Mar 26, 2021 5:22 am

Freedom of information? Do they need to show the copies? Copy them? Give them away? Make them available for viewing?

by **Sundowner64** » Thu Mar 28, 2024 1:30 am

I think I know the solution to this puzzle. (it's funny and very German, though)
But alas, as Markobr has not been here for more than 3 years and I don't know how to reach out to him we will probably never know.

by **doriana_** » Thu Mar 28, 2024 1:55 pm

I am also funny (up for debate) and very German (not up for debate), so I would be curious to know what the solution is. I think it's fair game to $poyl a puzzle that's been inactive for 3+ years.

by **Sundowner64** » Thu Mar 28, 2024 2:34 pm

SPOILERed after three years, I hope markobr does not mind.

OK then. GalFisk is right, it is about freedom of information and access to information in the possession of the government.

In Germany we have a Federal Agency for Media Potentially Harmful to Youngers (further: the Agency). Their job basically is to decide whether a media product (book, journal, movie, video, game, ..) can be made available to minors or not. If not, the item is put on an index and can be displayed for sale only in special shops or special sections of the shop where only adults can enter. Or might not be distributed at all.

And we have a Freedom of Information Act. It gives everyone the right to get access to any administrative information stored by government institutions, provided state secrets, trade secrets or privacy concerns do not stand against.

In 2013 a man from Cologne wanted to watch a porn movie that was on the index and has been available for adults for a while but not anymore at that time. So he filed a request based on the Freedom of Information Act to inspect the inspection copy of that movie the Agency still kept in their archives, claiming that the inspection copy is administrative information as the Agency used it to make an administrative decision.

The Agency refused and the case went to the court. The court basically approved the man's request and ordered the Agency to do one of two things:
- either to give the man an opportunity to watch the movie in the rooms of the Agency (they immediately and strictly refused, "we are not a porn theatre")
- or to provide the man with a copy of the inspection copy (which they refused as well, saying that they're not allowed to distribute a copy of copyrighted material)

However, German copyright law has an exception for materials that have been out of sale for more than two years. In that case it is legal to own a copy for strictly personal use (just it must not be digitalized and not be distributed).

So this brave man finally received his copy and could achieve transparency about the government's work and convince himself that the well respected Agency does a good job fully in line with the law.

Or what else you do with a porn movie.

The consequence of this decision: the Agency whose job it is to limit the access to certain media as long as they are generally available, might be required to do the opposite if the media are not available any more.

Once again: This is Germany.