Can LL know when someone falsilly verifies?

I've heard of people getting their age verified using documents from dead relatives, or celebrities, and even dead celebrities, does the company that do the verification really doesn't keep a record of what exactly was the data used when verifying?


and can you get punished for trying to or getting your age verified using documents not yours if they somehow manage to figure out you did it?

I'm not aged verified, is it a requirement for anything?

I not seem to be missing out on anything. I have used my CC and PayPal so maybe that taken as I'm over 18, which I guess is what the verifcation is about.

Punishment well if any will be cancelling of you SL Account what ealse would there be.

Love, June

Supposedly, Aristottle, the company that LL chose to do Age Verification, does not retain anything other than a list of names and "Age Verified - Pass" or "Age Verified - Fail" associated with each name. So no, LL can't go back and check the data that you used, to see that the passport number you provided was your Grandmother's.

If you were challenged on your age verification status, LL would have little choice but to suspend your account and require that you prove all over again that the allegations that you are not really over 18 were false. This proof apparently consists of providing LL with similar information to what you provided Aristotle with, and LL has no more way of validating that it isn't a dead neighbor's ID than Aristotle does.

If proven that you have provided false identity information, LL could ban your account and delete all your in-world assets. That is the risk you take if you lie, or if someone falsely accuses you and you can't satisfy the Inquisition afterwards.

I think I read somewhere that having payment info on file will also be accepted as age verification, I'm not sure

being age verified will increasingly become a requirement for mature-marked areas from what I could gather


edit:btw, this bellow was written before I got notified of Ceera's post
and btw, I appreciate your attempt to answer, guesses are good and all, but untill someone give me an answer that based on sound facts I'll still consider this question open

now regarding Ceera's post, you think they would still react that harshly after minors/unverified(potential minors) are officially allowed in the main grid?

They may or may not. They claim they don't, but given that the other half of their business is selling said information to the highest bidder, I would lean towards the former.



Sure. It's an extreme ToS violation to lie about whom you are.

Finally:



Sure, they CAN know or, rather, "find out". WILL they? Most likely not until it is too late (ie, someone brings it up in a legal case that enjoins or subpoenas them), or someone challenges it with credible evidence submitted to them.

No clue. LL tends to be all over the map when it comes to enforcement of rules. If it were me, I would expect them to react that harshly, because having rules is meaningless without enforcement.

would it even be legal for them to have access to that info? wouldn't they risk a huge lawsuit from tons of people if it becomes public that they lied about that and such?

If you used false documents to verify your age, whether Linden Lab will suspend your account is the least of your concerns. Identity fraud and identity theft are serious real world crimes.

Have access to what info? To the info you used to age-verify? Not in the least. You gave it to them.

Now, it would probably be highly illegal in most jurisdictions for them to disseminate that info without a warrant or subpoena.

If you are referring to your REAL identity, no, it's not illegal for them to have that info, or discover it via legal means. Still illegal to share it, though.

If you are referring to their claims about not having the info that you used with Aristotle to verify you, why would they have it? Why would they need it? They already have most of it anyway, since you gave it to them when you created your account. Of course, if it was fake, either you couldn't have age-verified with Aristotle, or when they obtained your REAL identity information, it wouldn't be illegal to have either.

Just curious, but why are you interested/concerned about this subject?

I was lucky that my passport worked, but I know many people are unable for several reasons to get their legal documents to be verified, or simply don't have anything that is accepted by the system etc. I was thinking about, if this was safe, if the age-verification restriction gets siginificantly widespread acreoss the grid to the point of impairing the Second Life of those people, to mention this possibility to some friends that would otherwise be forced away from their friends and their "homes", their past-times etc. And perhaps I would try using information from random people I manage to find thru Google to verufy si9me disposable new alts to check if it really works and such before spreading the word..

somthign I forgot to write in the previous post


if they don't associate that data with anything, don't keep it etc, how is that identity theft if you aren't gonna be identified with anyone, not yourself nor the supposed people that own physical copies of those documents, and the data will not be stored anywhere besides where you found it and such?

This really sounds like "I did so-and-so and I'm afraid of getting in trouble for it."

According to Aristotle, the only information it provides to the client using the service (Linden Lab in this case) is whether the person in question passed or failed the age identification system. No extra information is given.

If Aristotle did provide it to Linden Lab voluntarily, when it promised not to, that may violate some privacy laws somewhere. The result of which would most likely be Aristotle is fined or something if found guilty. I don't know much about those laws myself, though.

You could sue Linden Lab for breach of contract, or similar theory, if it promises you that you can use this age verification without revealing private information to Linden Lab, and using it results in information going to Linden Lab anyway. You probably have nothing against Aristotle, unless when using the service, Aristotle makes its own promise to you. Either way, you're not talking about multi-million dollar lawsuits most likely. If you lose no money as a result of the information sharing, your ultimate award in a lawsuit isn't going to be that high. Privacy laws might have mandatory civil penalties, but that depends on the particular law, and those things usually aren't terribly big dollar. Now, if it happens to a lot of people, there are class-action implications, and that would be a different subject monetarily.

Now, if Aristotle gives up information it has stored on your involuntarily (through subpeona, for example), then you probably have no claims on them. Remember that a subpoena is not necessarily limited to a government criminal investigation; anyone suing you civilly could potentially subpoena the information. And it's not terribly hard to obtain such a subpoena. If Linden Lab wanted to sue you, it could potentially locate the real you by subpoena on Aristotle.

However, Aristotle probably does not have a vast database of personal information on anyone. From what I can tell, it just uses other people's databases. It's the same databases that credit companies, bill collectors, and some employers use to check people out. You can buy access to those databases yourself; it's surprisingly cheap to get a background check on someone.

In fact, it's probably in Aristotle's best interests as little of its own information in possible. The more information it keeps, the more that information becomes target for subpoenas, and the less trustworthy Aristotle becomes. I don't see any reason why Aristotle (or Linden Lab, whoever is taking the documents) could not keep copies of documents you show unless they promise otherwise. Whether it's in their bests interests, I don't know (proof they did their job correctly vs. having something that can be subpoenaed).

Yes, you are taking a risk by using Aristotle. Practically, you'd have to do something very bad for anyone jto go through the trouble of looking up your transactions with Aristotle. If you didn't hack Second Life and do serious damage, or if you aren't a terrorist or trading child porn, all anyone is going to do is block your account and forget you. Yes, identifying yourself with false information can be a serious crime for which you could do serious time. Practically, the odds are very low that law enforcement will spend time coming after you unless you've actually hurt someone (or a law enforcement agency needs some wins for its anti-identity-theft dividion).

Keep in mind too it's hard to know what happens behind the scenes. The question you ask is _can_ Linden Lab know. They most certainly can; there's nothing technological preventing it. But they can break laws and break contracts. Don't assume that just because they can get in trouble for doing something means that they aren't doing it. If there is a very important reason that you do not want Linden Lab to have your information, how much do you want to gamble that they are respecting laws and contracts? How satisfying is it to you to get whatever you could get from a lawsuit if your information is compromised?

Edit: Oh, and as I understand it, all Aristotle does is tell Linden Lab "Yes- verified," or "No- not verified," (or maybe also "No- verified a minor". "No- not verified" could mean that there isn't enough information to verify. So not verifying should not necessarily send up any red flags. Now, there could be red flags that tell Aristotle that information you provide is false (you are 1000 years old, live on a continent that doesn't exist, have a 4-digit social security number). Now, bad information isn't necessarily proof of something false- it's more likely an innocent mistake. It's possible that enough red flags might need to be turned over to someone to investigate, though I would think that Aristotle would not want to do a lot of investigating and thus wouldn't do any unless some law forces them too. It's also possible that the F.B.I. or somebody has a list of information they send to these databases- if someone uses xxxxxxxxx SSN, contact us, there is a terrorist using that information. I don't know. Most likely, when you give bad information, you just don't get verified and Aristotle forgets and doesn't care unless someone forces them to care. Neither Aristotle, nor the FBI, nor anyone wants to spend a lot of time and money with a fraud investitation every time someone makes a typo on an age verification service.

lol, I agree, it does kinda sound kinda suspiscious if you don't expect the best of people you don't know and such, but if you ask anyone that knows me enough they would tell you that I wouldn't lie about things like this, I said I used my own passport to get verified, and that is the truth, if I had done something like this instead of clearly stating the opposite of what I did I would likelly word my way around making it so just from what I wrote people wouldn't be able to claim I admited doing somthing nor say I lied about it (I wonder if mentioning this characteristic of my behavior will come back to bite me later on...). Though to be honest, I might also act in similar way when I haven't done anything but I'm dealing with a delicate subject which could make me target of undeserved attacks if I endup not saying anything regarding me doing it or not or somthing as well as when trying to know more about somthing a friend of mine or somthing potentially did, like, to know what might be the consequences etc. (and yeah, I know that "I know this guy that got a friend that did so and so" thing is one of the classics "it's actually about me" things, but in this case I'm really talking about another person and not myselt)

Yup I'd say so, a shed load of trouble, that's fraud for a start.

People should just verify with information they're comfortable with, fortunately I was able to do so in concierge beta, although I was still miffed about having to do that being I was a paying customer already. However when it was pointed out to me that I could verify with less info than LL had on me I had no objection.

Once in a while I'll see a well known and respected community member acting kinda loopy (not any specific one; just this or that person).

I'll ask what's up... never do I get an answer... only to be later told "oh sorry, my son logged in and played a while as me!"

That's been my #1 issue.

Until age verification can detect who is sitting at the computer, it's nothing but CYA in the event of legal action.

According to some posts in the other discussions Aristotle has sold data in the past. More than one person said it, what that proves is another story. (So, third party becomes fourth, fifth, even ends up on the 'net according to some people.)

Most people agreed that the current age verification system needs improvement before asking all of SL to sign on. (Yes today only 'pervs and violence roleplayers' but wait.)