Second Life Forums Archive - Universal and Compulsory Age verification

Sys Slade

Registered User

Join date: 15 Feb 2007

Posts: 626

05-15-2007 06:39

http://integrity.aristotle.com/

From: someone

Insured and Guaranteed (merchants using Integrity, are indemnified for violations of laws relating to underage access)

and
http://integrity.aristotle.com/index.php_option=com_content&task=view&id=22&Itemid=46.html

From: someone

Insured. Integrity insures transactions against fines imposed on the merchant for underage sales.

It doesn't quite say that they will insure against civil cases and any awards from them. Fines are usually fairly small, damages awarded can get pretty high

It also only mentions issues relating to age verification rather than ID verification.

I don't buy LL taking these measures for some pretty low level insurance coverage.

_____________________

Send me the last 4 digits of a valid SSN, I'll verify you are who you say you are, even if you aren't.

Colette Meiji

Registered User

Join date: 25 Mar 2005

Posts: 15,556

05-15-2007 06:39

From: Atum Otis

Forgive me Lorna, but you will never understand as long as you imagine this proposal has anything whatever to do with reducing the number of minors at risk. For that it does nothing more than credit cards, and they did little.

This is about two things.
1. LL's Public Image.
2. LL's exposure to litigation.

Nothing whatever to do with actually in practice protecting more minors.

This is not irrational because LL is irrational - far from it.

It is because of the irrationality and hysteria in our culture, encouraged by our media and too often reinforced by our judiciary.

Irrationality and hysteria which must often be pandered to by those in power, as one of the prices we have to pay for democracy. There is always another election on the horizon.

This is true - Myspace is 10x more dangerous to actual Teens than SL. Reguardless of the adult content in SL. On Myspace -teens are encouraged through peer pressure to give information (pictures, names, more) about their REAL Lives.

But to people who dont know what Myspace and Second Life are they will simply see whatever muck the media is raking that day.

Walker Moore

Fоrum Unregular

Join date: 14 May 2006

Posts: 1,458

05-15-2007 07:03

From: Colette Meiji

While I understand your sentiment - its actually the only smart business move I see them making in all this, LOL.

After further thought, I'd love to see the conditions of this liability arrangement because I doubt Linden Lab are well covered enough at all to justify the verification nightmare they're unleashing upon us.

I'd be surprised if Integrity insure LL against any minor gaining grid access for example; only those who access adult flagged areas after fraudulently getting through the verification procedure. Even then it's a trivial gamble on Integrity's part because they probably know that if a TOS explicitly denies under-18 access, the law would probably put the blame at the parent/guardian of the child who illegally gained access to the grid and fraudulently verified him/herself.

If I'm right, the child has basically got to do two illegal things before Integrity needs to worry about paying LL's legal bills. OTOH, a child can still sign up, get a free prick and pixelslap with an adult on quiet PG land (no bed or object creation rights required) - Integrity wouldn't insure them against this, and the tabloids would still be screaming zOMFG P3DOs in SL if they found out about it.

_____________________

It's only a forum, no one dies.

Atum Otis

Registered User

Join date: 2 Mar 2005

Posts: 44

05-15-2007 09:45

From: Walker Moore

After further thought, I'd love to see the conditions of this liability arrangement because I doubt Linden Lab are well covered enough at all to justify the verification nightmare they're unleashing upon us..

Me too, Walker. My guess is that Integrity will have taken great care in the fine print, so that they can find a loophole allowing them to shrug off anything big enough to really matter.

I hope that LL have their lawyers negotiating hard on the fine print too. It would be sad for SL to take the damage this will inflict on customer loyalty if the insurance it is meant to buy fails to deliver. Remember also who seems likely to pay the insurance premium. Us.

I really find it almost impossible to believe that a company like Integrity won't try to sneak something into their main database out of this.

Even if it is only to add one simple extra fact about you:

"This particular person was a resident of SecondLife on suchandsuch a date".

Do you want that fact on sale ? I don't.

When you are in the game of statistics, demographics and profiling, even something that simple, combined with other indicators, can tell you a lot about an individual, and has saleable commercial value.

Have we been specifically promised that not even this will be allowed ? I don't think we have.

Atum Otis

Registered User

Join date: 2 Mar 2005

Posts: 44

05-15-2007 10:00

Come to think of it, how could Integrity give insurance cover in relationship to an individual if they don't maintain a full list of everyone they have verified, and the result?

The LL computers could make a mistake and let a failed person in despite receiving the correct flag. Integrity will not take responsibility for that.

"no record will be kept" eh ?

Sys Slade

Registered User

Join date: 15 Feb 2007

Posts: 626

05-15-2007 10:11

LL would also have to keep a record of data submitted and response received as proof that it was a failing on the part of aristotle/integrity. It would be naive to assume any company will just pay up on insurance without a fight.

_____________________

Send me the last 4 digits of a valid SSN, I'll verify you are who you say you are, even if you aren't.

tristan Eliot

Say What?!

Join date: 30 Oct 2005

Posts: 494

05-15-2007 10:57

From: Thanatos Pegler

The current proposal for an Age Verification System raises some very interesting issues.

1. SL is supposed to be an 18 years plus area of the internet and the current registration sytem has been adequate to ensure the integrity of that understanding. Either it is or is not. If it is then we do not need age verification.

2. If it is not then we have to do something. If we make AV available, then we can say that all avatars connected to Age verified accounts are within the terms of service. We then restrict Adult Content areas so only Age Verified accounts can go there. Back to point one. Sl is no longer a secure 18 plus environment. There could be kids in there and NOW people looking for young folk know where to concentrate their search. Not in the crack dens, brothels and sewers but in the nicer parts of town.

3. So now we have those who enjoy the adult side of SL (and I am one of them) happy and content that the people we shoot and shag are all adults. And when i put on my business/creative hat I can share that experience with people whose Rl profile does not worry me. But if I crack an off color joke - or drop and expletive as a Prim does not behave - can I be sure that I am not swearing in front of a minor?

My proposal is that we make Age Verification in Second Life Compulsory and Universal. 30 days to verify all accounts and then no access to the grid for those who choose not to. Let Linden Labs work out the fine details - countries where ID is a bit shaky and other administrative details.

Say that from June 1 that all accounts have 30 days to verify and on July one they will be banned access to the grid until they have complied.

The advantages of this proposal, as against the way Linden labs is thinking is:

1 we all know that the Avatar next to us is 18 plus or the sort of kid who will lie and steal and cheat to get their own way and no one is going to protect them no matter how much effort is made. And the same kid is probably going to use fake ID to get to their favoirte parts of Sl anyway under the current proposal.

2. Land owners do not have to worry about what content is on their land. Every one in SL is approved to go where they like

3. While it may seem draconian, universal and compulsory age verification is consistant, valid, reliable and fair. If people abuse it by using fake ID, then that is their look out. They can do that under the current proposal.

By treating all accounts the same, then there is no debate, no argument, no hair splitting etc.

So I propose, Compulsory Universal Age verification to ensure that Second Life is a secure over 18's site as per the Terms of Service.

This is a surefire way of reducing the active population.

As long as they require sensitive information that has no fraud protection like CCs do, I will not be becoming verified.

Banking Laws

Realty Serious

Join date: 14 Jun 2006

Posts: 602

05-15-2007 16:58

With the current company, I would leave SL after that 30 days. My information is not secure with them.

_____________________

"I sincerely believe that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid in posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale."

- Thomas Jefferson, 3rd U.S. President

Universal and Compulsory Age verification
Sys Slade Registered User Join date: 15 Feb 2007 Posts: 626	05-15-2007 06:39 http://integrity.aristotle.com/ From: someone Insured and Guaranteed (merchants using Integrity, are indemnified for violations of laws relating to underage access) and http://integrity.aristotle.com/index.php_option=com_content&task=view&id=22&Itemid=46.html From: someone Insured. Integrity insures transactions against fines imposed on the merchant for underage sales. It doesn't quite say that they will insure against civil cases and any awards from them. Fines are usually fairly small, damages awarded can get pretty high It also only mentions issues relating to age verification rather than ID verification. I don't buy LL taking these measures for some pretty low level insurance coverage. _____________________ Send me the last 4 digits of a valid SSN, I'll verify you are who you say you are, even if you aren't.
Colette Meiji Registered User Join date: 25 Mar 2005 Posts: 15,556	05-15-2007 06:39 From: Atum Otis Forgive me Lorna, but you will never understand as long as you imagine this proposal has anything whatever to do with reducing the number of minors at risk. For that it does nothing more than credit cards, and they did little. This is about two things. 1. LL's Public Image. 2. LL's exposure to litigation. Nothing whatever to do with actually in practice protecting more minors. This is not irrational because LL is irrational - far from it. It is because of the irrationality and hysteria in our culture, encouraged by our media and too often reinforced by our judiciary. Irrationality and hysteria which must often be pandered to by those in power, as one of the prices we have to pay for democracy. There is always another election on the horizon. This is true - Myspace is 10x more dangerous to actual Teens than SL. Reguardless of the adult content in SL. On Myspace -teens are encouraged through peer pressure to give information (pictures, names, more) about their REAL Lives. But to people who dont know what Myspace and Second Life are they will simply see whatever muck the media is raking that day.
Walker Moore Fоrum Unregular Join date: 14 May 2006 Posts: 1,458	05-15-2007 07:03 From: Colette Meiji While I understand your sentiment - its actually the only smart business move I see them making in all this, LOL. After further thought, I'd love to see the conditions of this liability arrangement because I doubt Linden Lab are well covered enough at all to justify the verification nightmare they're unleashing upon us. I'd be surprised if Integrity insure LL against any minor gaining grid access for example; only those who access adult flagged areas after fraudulently getting through the verification procedure. Even then it's a trivial gamble on Integrity's part because they probably know that if a TOS explicitly denies under-18 access, the law would probably put the blame at the parent/guardian of the child who illegally gained access to the grid and fraudulently verified him/herself. If I'm right, the child has basically got to do two illegal things before Integrity needs to worry about paying LL's legal bills. OTOH, a child can still sign up, get a free prick and pixelslap with an adult on quiet PG land (no bed or object creation rights required) - Integrity wouldn't insure them against this, and the tabloids would still be screaming zOMFG P3DOs in SL if they found out about it. _____________________ It's only a forum, no one dies.
Atum Otis Registered User Join date: 2 Mar 2005 Posts: 44	05-15-2007 09:45 From: Walker Moore After further thought, I'd love to see the conditions of this liability arrangement because I doubt Linden Lab are well covered enough at all to justify the verification nightmare they're unleashing upon us.. Me too, Walker. My guess is that Integrity will have taken great care in the fine print, so that they can find a loophole allowing them to shrug off anything big enough to really matter. I hope that LL have their lawyers negotiating hard on the fine print too. It would be sad for SL to take the damage this will inflict on customer loyalty if the insurance it is meant to buy fails to deliver. Remember also who seems likely to pay the insurance premium. Us. I really find it almost impossible to believe that a company like Integrity won't try to sneak something into their main database out of this. Even if it is only to add one simple extra fact about you: "This particular person was a resident of SecondLife on suchandsuch a date". Do you want that fact on sale ? I don't. When you are in the game of statistics, demographics and profiling, even something that simple, combined with other indicators, can tell you a lot about an individual, and has saleable commercial value. Have we been specifically promised that not even this will be allowed ? I don't think we have.
Atum Otis Registered User Join date: 2 Mar 2005 Posts: 44	05-15-2007 10:00 Come to think of it, how could Integrity give insurance cover in relationship to an individual if they don't maintain a full list of everyone they have verified, and the result? The LL computers could make a mistake and let a failed person in despite receiving the correct flag. Integrity will not take responsibility for that. "no record will be kept" eh ?
Sys Slade Registered User Join date: 15 Feb 2007 Posts: 626	05-15-2007 10:11 LL would also have to keep a record of data submitted and response received as proof that it was a failing on the part of aristotle/integrity. It would be naive to assume any company will just pay up on insurance without a fight. _____________________ Send me the last 4 digits of a valid SSN, I'll verify you are who you say you are, even if you aren't.
tristan Eliot Say What?! Join date: 30 Oct 2005 Posts: 494	05-15-2007 10:57 From: Thanatos Pegler The current proposal for an Age Verification System raises some very interesting issues. 1. SL is supposed to be an 18 years plus area of the internet and the current registration sytem has been adequate to ensure the integrity of that understanding. Either it is or is not. If it is then we do not need age verification. 2. If it is not then we have to do something. If we make AV available, then we can say that all avatars connected to Age verified accounts are within the terms of service. We then restrict Adult Content areas so only Age Verified accounts can go there. Back to point one. Sl is no longer a secure 18 plus environment. There could be kids in there and NOW people looking for young folk know where to concentrate their search. Not in the crack dens, brothels and sewers but in the nicer parts of town. 3. So now we have those who enjoy the adult side of SL (and I am one of them) happy and content that the people we shoot and shag are all adults. And when i put on my business/creative hat I can share that experience with people whose Rl profile does not worry me. But if I crack an off color joke - or drop and expletive as a Prim does not behave - can I be sure that I am not swearing in front of a minor? My proposal is that we make Age Verification in Second Life Compulsory and Universal. 30 days to verify all accounts and then no access to the grid for those who choose not to. Let Linden Labs work out the fine details - countries where ID is a bit shaky and other administrative details. Say that from June 1 that all accounts have 30 days to verify and on July one they will be banned access to the grid until they have complied. The advantages of this proposal, as against the way Linden labs is thinking is: 1 we all know that the Avatar next to us is 18 plus or the sort of kid who will lie and steal and cheat to get their own way and no one is going to protect them no matter how much effort is made. And the same kid is probably going to use fake ID to get to their favoirte parts of Sl anyway under the current proposal. 2. Land owners do not have to worry about what content is on their land. Every one in SL is approved to go where they like 3. While it may seem draconian, universal and compulsory age verification is consistant, valid, reliable and fair. If people abuse it by using fake ID, then that is their look out. They can do that under the current proposal. By treating all accounts the same, then there is no debate, no argument, no hair splitting etc. So I propose, Compulsory Universal Age verification to ensure that Second Life is a secure over 18's site as per the Terms of Service. This is a surefire way of reducing the active population. As long as they require sensitive information that has no fraud protection like CCs do, I will not be becoming verified.
Banking Laws Realty Serious Join date: 14 Jun 2006 Posts: 602	05-15-2007 16:58 With the current company, I would leave SL after that 30 days. My information is not secure with them. _____________________ "I sincerely believe that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid in posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale." - Thomas Jefferson, 3rd U.S. President

Welcome to the Second Life Forums Archive

Universal and Compulsory Age verification