Child av---illegal?

Seems not enough information to go on for people to make definitive statements that if they accidently see a child life avatar having sex that they will go to jail.

"might" be in violation - is maybe more accurate?



--------------------------------
--------------------------------


One thing, its not really possible to make a "Child" av in second life. You can only make an Avatar that resembles a child.

The female avatars still have some breast even with the slider at zero. Hands and feet are both overly large for the size of the avatar.

The Male avatars the chin is still a lil bit manly no matter what you do. And the arm shape is of course all wrong.

definitely not the sorts of issues someone would run into if creating avatars indistinguishable from Real Life Children.

=p

Whilst most probably LL did ban age-sex-play partially due to the German laws (same as the gambling, US is the ONLY country where it's banned, it's 100% legal in the UK and rest of the world), it's almost certain they also banned it due to the unsavory nature of the activity and the fact that, if one enjoys it then they almost certainly like the idea of it in RL.

Would you want your company to have the potential to be associated with paedeophillia? I wouldn't and I don't blame LL for doing their best to reduce the chances of their company being associated with it.

From memory at least one person, RL arrested and associated with SL age-sex-play was caught with child pron in their possession and I'm 100% certain they where not alone.

It's common sense to ban something, which has a likeness to, an illegal activity. Especially when the chances are the practioners of such activities could/do/will also use said medium ( i.e. SL ) to foster/promote etc. RL illegal activities too.

thats disgusting. and you dont have any authority to make a statement like that.

paedeophillia and sexual age play are quite mutually exclusive (as the names suggest).

They are a news person, and have license to make things up as they go along..

First of all, no 'authority' is necessary to express one's opinion. Second, I am rather offended by the implication that we as news people make up the news. I hope that smiley meant you were teasing.

Believe me, we couldn't make up some of the insanity that happens -- not only in Second Life, but in Reality.

edit: Not to mention that there are laws about factual reporting.

P2

well let me rephrase You have no authority with me. and i disagree with your post. i feel you are highly uninformed on the topic. deal with it

No one is trying to be in authority over you. You certainly have the right to disagree, and let me remind you that I never said that I agreed or disagreed with Katier's statement. No reason to be a twit over this.

P2

im not the one making slanderous, paranoid accustations about littles on a public forum, embaressing myself by making authoritive comments that have no basis in reality and only come from a sick mind. im not the one name calling. get a grip

http://blog.secondlife.com/2007/05/09/accusations-regarding-child-pornography-in-second-life/

Whilst LL where unable to get hold of the images in question, the fact is that LL where informed that REAL LIFE paedeophilic images where found in SL in association with the two banned individuals.

I also didn't say YOU did, in fact I did not name names, however I have spent some time looking into this topic for the purposes of reporting on it and the conclusion was that the risk of an resident who enjoys having sexual activities with an avatar who acts like (i.e. roleplays the role) a child and has the appearance of a child would have at the least a fantasy of doing the same activity in RL.

Hahahaha... slanderous? Paranoid? You are hilarious.

Thanks for making me smile this morning.

P2

http://blog.secondlife.com/2007/05/09/accusations-regarding-child-pornography-in-second-life/

Nuff said.

ageplay doesnt equal child porn. Youll never convince me the two are related.

edited to include this:

and anyone sick enough to possess child porn or pass it in sl well they are sick anyway and it its not because of ageplay. its like someone playing a shooting game and going out in real life to commit murder. its not the games fault. They were disturbed before they logged in.

yep. two adults, no children, and no child porn.

"On Thursday May 3, we were contacted by German television network, ARD, which had captured images of two avatars, one that resembled an adult male and another that resembled a child, engaged in depicted sexual conduct. Our investigations revealed the users behind these avatars to be a 54-year-old man and a 27-year-old woman. Both were immediately banned from Second Life.

During a subsequent interview with ARD’s Report Mainz documentary on Friday May 4, which aired Monday, the reporter presented photographs that he said were found in Second Life and that appeared to include sexual photographs involving a child.

ARD reports that it has handed the images to a state attorney in Halle, Germany. Linden Lab has proactively attempted to contact the authorities, as is our practice if ever an image of child pornography is reported in Second Life, but has not received a response or any other contact from the German authorities.

Despite requests, neither ARD nor the Germany authorities have yet disclosed to us the location of the photographic images in question, and we have not been able to independently locate them. No further details about the images or the potential investigation reported in the German press are known to us at this time."

PHOTOGRAPHS...

Not in game screenshots but RL Photographs.

i agree that child pornography is a horrible crime, involving a real child when it occurs. it would break anyones heart to see a real child abused in this manner. but that isnt what age play is about. its a completely different issue. And when you lump the two together you are insulting alot of people who would rather die then see a real child abused by accusing them of things theyd never in their lives ever consider doing. So, altho you may feel righteous or clever, you are not doing anything positive by attacking ageplay. Quite the opposite. my advice is dont give into mass hysteria because you lose your credibility and harm others with your lies.

plainly obvious to me you have bothered with NO reasearch on this matter. you havent even bothered to read the blog youve referred.
i'll post it again.
read it this time.


"ARD reports that it has handed the images to a state attorney in Halle, Germany. Linden Lab has proactively attempted to contact the authorities, as is our practice if ever an image of child pornography is reported in Second Life, but has not received a response or any other contact from the German authorities.

Despite requests, neither ARD nor the Germany authorities have yet disclosed to us the location of the photographic images in question, and we have not been able to independently locate them. No further details about the images or the potential investigation reported in the German press are known to us at this time."

errUh - you might wish to step back a little bit, kay? There is an issue with two (really, three) issues bein stuck together in dis. What I see Katier talking abut is dat the people who got booted were trading real stuff which is really really gross. Dat is at the core of all it all.

An ya, those same people were involved on one level or another with sexual ageplay which in SL context is a very big, very multisided issue dat... well, the number of threads dat come up on it is an example of how much of an issue it is. On top of this, because of the *potential* for legal issues (whether or not these potentials are real, which was kinda talked about above) as well as the potential taint such things can put on LLs attempt to be a legitimate business (jes a fact of it, not takin a side here), you end up with a blanket ban on any depictions of sexual activity with a child avatar.

Note well dat from the blog post, though, the following "On Thursday May 3, we were contacted by German television network, ARD, which had captured images of two avatars, one that resembled an adult male and another that resembled a child, engaged in depicted sexual conduct.... Both were immediately banned from Second Life." In dat case it's purty clear dat the *avatars* were banned for their actions, then subsequently the issue of the trading of gross RL piccies came up.

Do all who are involved in sexual ageplay wanna have sex with RL kids? No. But it would seem dat in this one really big, really ugly situation, this group did. It might be dat many who are *here* in SL who are involved with dat might have a RL interest in doing gross stuff to kids beyond what you may be talking about. I can't -- and quite honestly, don't -- wanna speculate too much on that. It's simply not my ting.

I might diagree with Katier to an extent on the "almost certainly" part of it all. I know dat some people like doin "schoolgirl games" in the real world, or other sexual ageplay stuff, with an understanding dat there being (I'm gonna make up a term here) "infantalized adults" rather than real kids. Yes I am *almost certain* dat neither one group or another is the whole of all who might have used SL for sexual ageplay.

Nevertheless, let's keep dis all civil, kay?

Mari
(Who, by means of full disclosure, is also a reporter for the M2, and has been involved with newsprint for some time IRL)

i have no disagreement with anything you are saying Mari except that maybe if there are real pedos on the grid i have never witnessed it. But i will allow it is possible. Even if thats the case tho i believe it would be a minority. And id rather they were here then in rl acting out on real children. And my only real complaint is that your coworker lumped all littles together calling them potential pedos. I cant just sit back and read that and not comment on it. But i appreciate your calm attempt at diplomacy.

I didn't imply all SL kids where potential Pedo's. Not for a second, in fact if you read the current edition of the M2 you'll find an article I wrote about (and was more than happy to write ) an event that Marianne ran.

I think we do have a slight issue with terms.

People like Marianne - I think they're great, guaranteed to put a smile on my face at least, I guess I'm a bit of a kid at heart and some of the stuff they put together is awsome.

Ageplay - this is a multi-meaning term which muddies things somewhat.

(1)In RL Ageplay - Adults wearing kiddies clothes, perfectly legal, as is sexual activities of some nature between said adults. Everyone can see that both are full sized consenting adults.

(2)Now some may call SL kids - ageplay - I don't. If you think I'm saying these residents are potential paedeophiles I was not, in no way EVER saying that at all.

(3)Kidlike avatars in SL doing sexual activity can also come under the ageplay banner. Better description I guess is 'sexual activities involving at least one avatar who has the appearance of a child.'

This last activity is the one that's banned, it's the one that that blog entry relates too and it appears that during the course of the investigation by the German TV network they also found, in SL, illegal child pornography.

It's also the activty that has the possibility of taking place between RL paedeophiles because clearly the visual aspect of the activity is what appeals ( if that wasn't the case then you'd do activity (2) ).


Activities (1) and (2) are in no way illegal in any way shape or form and I have no problem with in any shape or form and apologise if anyone thought I was saying there was a problem with them.

did anyone ever see this kiddie porn? or is it urban legend?

I believe that Robin Linden did, if memory serves. For myself, I'll pass thanks.

Mari

In the German documentary, a reporter visited Linden Lab's office in San Francisco and confronted Robin Linden with textures within Second Life (running on a laptop) that supposedly contained child pornography. The viewer didn't see them for obvious reasons, but the voiceover claimed that's what they were, and Robin sure as hell looked visibly shocked.

Now, it's quite possible she was shown nothing more than a few pictures of Philip Rosedale in a tu-tu, but I think it's highly likely she was indeed confronted with images of child pornography. It's a difficult call. Even the most serious documentary makers' editorial standards seem to be getting called into question these days.

Yes.

The German documentary was posted, and probably still is somewhere. I saw it. It depicted avatars that included a grossly fat middle-aged man and an obvious child, both naked, performing assorted acts, most prominently oral sex, with oh-so-"discreet" little circles obscuring the actual conjoining of orifices and protuberances. To say nothing was left to the imagination is an understatement. At least the documentary left out any sound effects, like squish, squirt, or whatever. I hope you get the picture, because this is already more detail than I cared to get into when I started. If you really want to, I am sure you can find them. Somewhere. I would rather not look, so you will have to hunt them for yourself. I would suggest trying the archives of said German TV station first.

As for the RL pictures, they were there too, but much downplayed to the point of being almost unnoticeable unless you were looking, even though they were patent evidence of RL crimes and the pixel sex was not. You see, the avatar action was so much more - ah- telegenic.