Am I breaking the law?

Here is a good question that LL needs to pay lawyers to look into. I live in Arkansas and it has some of the most restrictive obsenity laws in the nation. The question is, can looking at virtual sex between pixelated characters on a computer be considered obscene?



Question is, since there is no film involved in any way can this be applied to SL? If I make a recording of virtual sex am I committing a felony?

Does "film" cover computer generated graphics?

do you know that they actually enforce this law?

the reason i ask is that I used to live in Texas, and they had all sorts of draconian laws about sex in their lawbooks, but most of them hadn't been applied in decades.

i also note that it doesn't say anything about "cartoon" sex, which could be considered art.

I'd say no. Film specifically refers to celluloid.

i see that as a weird and sad law

hmmm, some do shoot digital porn these days.

Probably that last statement is the nasty bit.

What's nasty about it is it uses the word "film" to define "film". In a strict logic sense, it's meaningless and the whole law is defunct.

But do they enforce sex cubes?

The law is refering to recorded media. They could argue the generic use of the word film to include all forms of video recording.

However their entire argument would be moot as SL is live...

My condolences.

Scary to read... I am happy that i live in Sweden...

""Obscene" means that to the average person, applying contemporary community standards, the dominant theme of the material taken as a whole appeals to prurient interest"


Pixel sex by two non-real cartoons isn't obscene to the average person(applying contemporary community standards). In fact, applying contemporary community standards, almost anything goes now. lol

Oral sex (let's not go beyond oral... or this will devolve into a conversation about whether or not sheep can cook!) is still illegal in many states. Do they enforce these ridiculously puritan, out-of-date, nonsensical laws? Hell no.

-Flip

"Obscene," the operative word here and its definition are the most troubling to me. In recent years in some parts of the United States, "average person" and "contemporary community standards" have become increasingly conservative. Does the traditional definition of pornography (seemingly what this law is about), "I know it when I see it," apply here?

The reference to "film," with no specific reference to video or computer-generated or originated media, indicates that this particular law has been on the books for quite some time. I imagine that it would need to be updated to apply to SL sex and the recording thereof. As it stands, it could only be enforced unevenly. As with the case Lawrence v. The State of Texas, an outdated, draconian, law was used to target and persecute individuals whose sexual orientation might differ from that of "the average person." If fear of homosexuality caused the overt persecution in the Lawrence case, my question becomes: How do they feel in Arkansas about technology and those who wield it adeptly?

true for georgia, but if they enforced it, i'd have been sentenced to life in prison.

But really, my two cents is this...... What goes on between two consenting adults behind closed doors, is none of the government's business. However, with the changes sweeping our fair nation, I'm beginning to wonder if Stormtroopers will begin doing "Sexual Relations Sweeps" to keep two consenting adults from performing what is to them, a wondrous, natural act.

I'm saddened by the fact that our nation is becoming a religious fourth reich. However, it's still my home, and I love it. I find it odd though, didn't some of our ancestors move to this land to escape such puritanical tyranny?

just my opinion,
Joseph

Would be very hard for arkansas to hold that law against SL as they are not based in that state, now against you? they shouldnt since you are not operating a business to share the material. what is funny is the men/women who made that law probably has some kind of "obscene" film/art/etc in thier own home....Wonder how they handle regular TV? soap opera's alone are risque today lollll
Also funny that they have that law but have tattoo parlors- am sure people have got nude or obscen images tattoo on themselves lol
Here in Oklahoma we dont have that law, but illegal for the tattoos......Am thinking the bible belt states need to keep it in the church and not individual households, as not everyone is the same religion or beliefs.


ohh and what of wedding showers? or bachelor parties? some people do gag gifts..do hope they dont go that far when people are doing a OLD tradition of fun among willing adults.

I would say it's not illegal for three reasons, not that any of it would matter if the judge were a the same type of prude good ol' boy that wrote the law to begin with. Unfortunately, the protections once enforced by our legal system are rapidly degrading. Anyway, here are the three arguments I would make in your favor:

1. As you pointed out there's no film involved, and the law specifically says film. At the time, I'm sure they thought they were being thorough by using such a strict definition, and had computers, digital media, and virtual reality existed then, they probably would have been included, but the fact is they weren't. It would be apropriate to argue that had law makers wanted to include these things in their definition of "film" they've had decades now in which to write them in but they haven't. Therefore, it's perfectly reasonable to assume these forms of media are deliberately exempt.

2. Their definition of "obscene" hinges on what they call "contemporary community standards". Since we all know porn is incredibly popular in SL, it's obvious that the standard of the community within SL is to allow it. The question then becomes is the porn happening in Arkansas or is it happeining in SL. I would submit that it's not actually happening in Arkansas, since people in SL are from all over the world and the servers are located in California. How that relates is that paragraph A says you can't "exhibit, sell, offer to all, give away, circulate, produce, distribute, attempt to distribute, or have in [your] possession any obscene film" within the borders of Arkansas, but it doesn't say you can't find a way to view such a film by yourself that is happening some place else. If the film were being shown on the moon and you had a powerful enough telescope that you could see it, I don't think you could be arrested for stargazing.

3. Most importantly, this law is entirely unconstitutional. The law itself is a clear violation of the first ammendment. Enforcing it would likely require a violation of the fourth ammendment. Writing it was probably a violation of the tenth ammendment (although that one's a little iffy). As I said earlier, it's unlikely that this would matter in courthouse ruled over by the types of minds that wrote the law to begin with, but it certainly would matter upon appeal to a higher court if it were ever to get that far. Actually, come to think of it, scratch that last part. Since the republicans have now effectively destroyed the senate and their goal is to destroy the courts, it's highly unlikely the consititution will serve to protect any of us from anything for much longer.

What it comes down to is.

The person accessing the questionable material is rersponsable for knowing and understanding their local laws and not violating them. As noted on most porn sites is a disclaimer " Do not access this site if it will violate your local laws".

A few years ago, when I first went to Ft. Smith, I noticed that across the river in Oklahoma there were a whole lot of XXX signs. I believe that these businesses intended to sell their wares to Arkansans.

On my last trip there a few months ago, those stores were still there and there wasn't a porno patrol at the border coming back.

Now for all I know these stores sell Playboy Magazines and that's it. I never went into any of the establishments. I just like to drive to other states when I travel on business!

If I remember correctly Arkansas might be the state I remember reading about. The aritcle I remember erading was when the law was past back a few years ago. It indicated that NO ADULT MATERIAL be sold from WITHIN the state. Hence the signs in Oklahoma. It also allowed for the transporation of material into state and the buying online of said material. I think it was mostly just to get rid of the local shops.

I'd say so long as you are not making $$ off the sales you should be ok.

As for unconstitional...don't get me started on supid/improper laws. There are a ton just noone cares.