Estate owners who Rent to others, what will your policy be for Verification?

Let's consider this seriously.


If the risk is being sued, it will be...

a) from someone in the United States:

Something happened on the grid? Yeah? Prove it. Screenshot? Er... yeah that's damning 'proof' isn't it? Pffft. But let's say they *do* have proof that little Billy saw cartoon characters making woo-woo. How do you bring a case like that to court, and stay clear of child social services? A case like that is just begging for a parental negligence charge in response. Or if someone is really spiteful, just an anonymous tipoff to local child welfare authorities.

b) sued by someone in a different country:

How I would respond: "I don't wanna talk to you no more, you empty headed animal food trough wiper! I fart in your general direction! You mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries! Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time!"



If the risk is 'shut down or else' it will come from...

a) United States authorities:

If the Feds tell me to stop doing something, or to remove content or whatever, hey, sure, done deal. But I'll respond when it happens. They aren't exactly going to come to my house with a SWAT team and extract me over this. Likely I'll get a prissy letter first. Websites get warnings from their ISP's for inappropriate content, and can be back up and running the same day. I suppose the SL equivalent might be loss of public access on the grid until I remedied whatever the situation was.

Federal judges aren't stupid, either. I'm clearly not in the smut business, and if 'customers' of mine get up to stuff in my sims, I'd likely have as much responsibility for it as Delta would have for couples joining the Mile High Club in their 747 bathroom.


b) Foreign authorities:

If whatever I was doing was a serious threat to the Company's business model, I'd consider tightening up the rules. Gotta think of it that way.

But let's just say I *am* now the most wanted man in the Grand Duchy of Freedonia because two people made cartoon characters rub together.

Well, they can try to come get me, I guess! Better have a really big navy.



* * * * *

Perspectives:

1) I think what's important to realise is that our risks *right now* are the same. Anyone worried that the Thought Police will bust down their door *right now* over content you have on the grid? Even if you sell 'adult' stuff? Well, there it is then. I didn't think you were all that worried now either.

2) SL websites like secondcitizen have 1000000000000000000 times more risk than any of us on the grid have. Think about the content available and the ease of access. We aren't exactly the canary in the coal mine here.

3) Another point: forget about sexuality, that's nothing. Want real trouble with foreign governments? Talk politics.

*shudders* politics...

Zenmondo Wormser already sells a script that does just that: unless someone is on a notecard list it denies usage of things like pose balls. Don't quote me if I'm wrong, but I think it's something that can be put into any modifiable object.

You've made a lot of good points Desmond - in this thread and others. (Gah, I feel like I should address you as Mr. Shang - you've been one of my role models in SL for some time, based on your level-headed posts in these forums and the high-esteem many people hold you in...) But back on topic..

I have one island. I'm contemplating a second. My biggest concern with all this verification business is not being sued, nor is it running into trouble with some government, foreign or domestic. (FWIW I'm in Canada.) I agree that a lawsuit over such things is silly nonsense, and I strongly suspect / hope my government has better things to do with its time than worry about pixel grinding.

My biggest concern is the Lindens. I don't want to log in one day to find I've been suspended or banned because some non-verified guest, or resident even, has rezzed a sexbed and gone at it. Like with the 'broadly offencive' stuff, the talk about common sense and the lack of hard definitions, leaves this whole thing open to far too much leeway and personal judgement. I don't want the hassle and the trouble of trying to contact LL and straighten things out after a misunderstanding, or after an overzealous Linden has decided that a vendor in my Mall is too risque to be merely 'Mature'.

Personally, I haven't made any decisions about 'restricted content' on my island and before I do so, I'll talk to all my residents. But this is where my concern lies... not with governments and courts, just Linden Lab.

-Atashi

While I agree with Desmond's analysis of the issues for US or Foreign governmental agencies or individual lawsuits, that isn't what I would worry about. The Feds or the French National News or Joe Griefer in Bulgaria are not the ones who would shut down someone running a "normal" Second Life.

What I worry about is what ** Linden Lab ** may do, without any recourse that we can appeal to, if they feel that some individual or landowner hasn't made a sufficiently forthright attempt to restrict access to the sexual content on their land. It isn't some individual or government that would shut you down. It's LL, fearing for their own business. The Lindens could, and likely would, suspend/ban and ask questions later, if ever. Just as they do when someone is suspected of passing funds inapprpriately according to their "Risk API" evaluation. Lock the account, fine 150%, and then maybe try to determine if the person was actually guilty, or if someone framed them by dumping stolen L$ on the victim? Face it, LL's track record for common sense decisions isn't very strong.

Will they give warnings first? Ye gods, I certainly should hope so. But I still have no doubt that ANY sexual pose ball or animation will fall onto the list that they will say we must restrict. So if it's my land, and I'm not running the G-rated "happy bunny amusement park", then I would rather err on the side of caution, and since this IS an adult game, assume that any content that might be considered Adult has to be restricted.

Desmond what are you talking about? The risk is that you have many $ invested in SL and LL ban you not that anyone in RL will sue you. Nobody sane or of normal income would attempt to sue somebody in SL with all the internet/transnational issues involved and the tiny sums involved in world - the fact that LL is still in existence is testament to that.

Ceera and Atashi are totally right. LL have more or less said it is 'common sense' what should require a Restricted Content parcel flag. Which means they want to keep their options open to discipline anyone they feel like - and means that all the risk is dumped on business owners again. The fact that LL will not police this as usual and rely on ARs means that landowners become at the mercy of anyone who wants to AR them. Anyone who feels like it can get a landowner disciplined by having cybersex on their land and getting a friend to AR the landowner unless the landowner declares all their land Restricted Content.

But what if you have tenants who do not want to get age verified? Be interesting to know whether people will kick them out or take the risk of getting into trouble for a random AR. If you kick them out and they get annoyed about it - see the last paragraph.

A point raised in another thread about this is that what is the point of stopping people entering these parcels anyway when anyone can unhitch their camera and fly it anywhere they like?

Call me Des, please. It's what everybody calls me, unless they are calling me Juvenile (I got that a lot after this incident: http://www.care-cds.com/blog/?p=19 but I must confess I really loved the negative attention!)

I really don't know what the Company would do. But here's how I'd guess:

1) Significant risk to the Company: ride in with the Four Lindens of the Apocalypse and delete everything reported on sight, as they did with reported gaming content. And thus complying with whatever laws there are.

2) Minimal risk to the Company: allow people to flag their content, shrug and forget about it entirely unless their business model is threatened. And thus complying with whatever laws there are.



Also, consider, does anyone think they could stay in business if they had a policy of banning any account that ever did the wild thing?

Anything could happen, sure, but I suspect the Company might have noticed that sexy things are popular on the grid. You know, stumbled across this little tidbit somewhere in the half billion square meters of grid filled with kinky toys.

So such a policy would be a far greater threat to their business model than any adult content issues ever could be.

For now, the best plan would seem to be wait-and-see, as far as finding out how LL plans to deal with 'violations'.

Ideally, the public areas of my island will remain mature but not restricted and my residents can decide for themselves if they want to flag their land 'restricted' or not. Hopefully as things progress, we'll see some form of guidance from LL either through statements on the blog or reports of their actions here in the forums.

And - I read the page on that link, it was quite amusing. I will spend this weekend contemplating the Colours of Waikiti that I may have them handy to place on a prim for all the world to see, should I need to 'throw down' with some competing islanders

-Atashi

A few points.

1) If I'm Abuse Reported for someone wandering in and doing the wild thing on the lawn in Caledon, I don't think it will stick whatsoever. Common sense.

2) So say they simulate someone doing this in an area ostensibly understood to be private, and camera in on it. Camming in on somebody is harassment. Reporting yourself doing such an act is imbecilic.

Good chance you'll end up getting yourself suspended in the first case, and getting yourself suspended (and winning a Darwin award!) in the second.

3) I'm a private estate owner. The plan, eventually, is to have formal abuse reports go to estate owners anyway, sooner or later, and possibly my estate managers too. Will I ban myself?

4) Let's say you are right, and I can be *banned* because of *your* actions. Well, gee, game over for all of us already then! Not a case I'm worried about, because if true it's all for naught anyway no matter what I do. shrug

Lindens have been known to shoot first and ask questions later.

Camming around is harassment? I don't think so. If you view SL as one large art display, how is someone who is exploring and looking at the interior decor of these houses harassing anyone?

Not likely. See above.

This is a true wait-and-see issue; this kind of AR might not be in your hands. If all the ARs go to you and you never enforce them, what do you think is going to happen? You won't get to keep the enforcement right for this particular AR.

Not necessarily, but... good luck, Des.

I agree completely. 70% of LL's revenues are from land tier fees. Losing the tier from actual casinos was not crippling; one casino serviced a LOT of gamblers. Triggering an exodus of residential sim owners would be damaging.

Also, estate owners might want to consider that those who are willing to keep their parcels mature but not restricted will have a competitive advantage.

Buy or rent property to which I cannot bring any unverified friends? Not this girl! /me bought land largely so I could have friends over. I intend to USE the party deck I put on my mountainside!

Service terms, section 4.1.

Invasion of privacy mentioned, stalking mentioned, threatening mentioned. Yes, privacy! Go read it, it may surprise. These aren't casual mentions either. They have real teeth. I'm pretty sure harassment is still by far the #1 reason for suspension of accounts.

It would be really, really, really stupid to cam into an ostensibly private area, make record of avatars interacting there and send it to a Company official, unless they were griefing your own land.

And god help you if you put a chatspy in with them.





Why am I so sure?

In the past year and a half, plenty of visitors have made themselves too 'involved' with residents residing in my sims, in an unwelcome manner.

Often it's smarter for me not to ban the offending account from my region. That way, the affected resident doesn't have to play the alt guessing game and the Company can suspend the main account of the perpetrator.

I won't comment on specific incidents. But let's just say, it would be a phenomenally stupid move to come into my region and do *anything* that resembles stalking or invasion of privacy.

Precisely why I won't flag my sim. It's hard enough as it is finding renters in this glutted market.

I'm proud of you Figgie.

Des, I used to rent on an island and as one of the large landholders, I was out and about looking at the changes to the island. I was just flying around, looking at what was new. What did I come across? Two people having sex in a private residence, no privacy tint on, just banging away. I didn't stay and watch. But if I were a different person, and this occurred after the restricted flag implementation, I would have been well within my right to AR them under the current rules, if the parcel wasn't properly flagged. I wasn't harassing anyone. I was just flying around looking at changes to the property near mine.

And any random explorer who had such a sentiment would be more than justified to submit an AR if they were the sensitive kind. Were they dumb for doing it with the windows open? Maybe. But not every person camming around is a stalker or harasser and I am loath to think that LL will assume that they are. But then, LL has been known to shoot first and ask questions later.. ah whatever.

But would you , truthfully? Even if the windows were open, it is private land inside a private residence. Anyone that small minded who wouldn't just fly away and forget about it is just beyond words in my opinion.

Like I said, I would have to be a different person. I wouldn't AR them, however tactless they were. I expect people to do what comes naturally in their homes. But that isn't the point. There are people who are sensitive to this, and would AR it in a heartbeat. Clearly, such people exist.

You have a right to abuse report anybody for anything, really - the case made here is that they weren't being very private about it. And we all know that flagging their parcel wouldn't help anyway, with the curtains wide open. This is more akin to a 'doing it on the lawn' situation than anything else.

I'm pretty sure it would be largely ignored, or you might get a response of 'please tell your sim owner to deal with this.'

Incidentally (and this is a chatty post, please don't mistake this for argument) I once got a 'doing the naughty on my lawn' report in Caledon that went like this:

(loosely paraphrased)

Des to estate manager: Hey, someone's doing the wild thing on the lawn in Victoria City, are you down that way?

Estate manager: Yes, I'm right here... what's going on?

Des: I just got a report of two people having wild sex in public by the library.

Estate manager: There's nobody here, but... OMG! That's me!

Des: O_o ???

Estate manager: It was a kitty pounce hug animation! Totally PG! Sheesh!

Des: *laughing his butt off in RL*

Estate manager: *really witty comeback that I can't post on forums*

Des: Well, carry on then, pip pip! *blush*

I wouldn't call them tactless. They were inside a structure. Careless maybe. Tactless would be if they were out on the front lawn.
Personally, If I have to live in fear of such people, on space that I bought and pay fees to use, save for resorting to some personally objectionable censorship scheme, then perhaps SL is not a place worth coming back to.

I don't begrudge you protecting your investment, but I personally would prefer the philosophy of Des or Figtree in my landlord.

One would hope that they've left SL LONG before accidentally seeing 2 people doing the nasty in a private house. One would hope that they're out there in RL thumping the good book and making life difficult for liberals. Oh wait, that's our President!

It's not just my investment, but theirs too. It's their homes, their stability. And it's not like I'm not listening to them; I am asking them to talk to me. So far, they are complaisant. No one has a burr up the ass like the folks here do. I expected the burr; it's not there. Yet.

I would expect private island plot owners to be just as protective of their investment, especially those that fork out thousands of L just to acquire a plot.

I guess we'll just see how it goes.

I know people that don't go to Disneyland or amusement parks in general, because they don't like their kids around people who might have the word 'hell' on their tee shirt, or other evil stuff such as that.

There are plenty of countries, for instance, where values dictate that women aren't allowed to consort with men outside their family, not allowed to drive, not allowed to show their face.

How does anyone maintain such repressive power over literally half of a population? Because that power was granted, in a zillion insidious ways, by the very people living in fear of it.

The right way to respond to ridiculously repressive social values is to nonviolently, pervasively, overwhelmingly and en masse oppose them.

* * * * *

Sure, if there's a law in my land I'll obey the law. No question. I do believe in rule of law, when under otherwise civilised circumstances.

I may not be the greatest fighter for rights on the grid, but neither am I going to tuck my tail in and cower.

Secret righteous agents of repressive morality skulking around - ticking like bombs ready to go off the moment their delicate sensibilities are offended? They can go to hell.

Benjamin Frankin had a quote about giving up freedom for security. I'd rather be banned than live in fear.

/me cheers!

in MY OWN SIMS I will ignore the entire stupid idea and carry on enjoying a virtual world with less narrow minded restrictions ( so far ) than the 1st world. This is all the Game Providers responsibilty not the resident's devolved task. It quite clearly says this is an over 18 game despite the fact that 'over 18' only has real meaning wihtin western countries where 18 is their appointed legal age and most of europe is lower. I refuse to get dragged into all this nonsense and become a vicarious enforcer of stupid neurotic fear-driven policies aimed at nothing more than appeasing the mythical 'offended person' or dealing with the rare 'underage' intruder to SL. It is the Linden's clear task to run their commercial world properly and if they have these precious insecure rules and worries it's up to them to regulate who and how people can join the game. I have my credit card details and address on file they take my money near $500 a month for 3. 5 years, let them sort this nervous mess out.

It's not my job to be Community Service Officer and do their policing for them nor will i demean my mind to the level of these idiot (mostly American) moralists who insist on Disneyfying the virtual universe. Deal with it!

Respect for this attitude. Very well said.



This may be, but it presupposes that there is a mass consensus against the oppression. This is often lacking, and I think it clearly is lacking in SL where there just is no consensus about anything at all.