second try: age play

torley thanks for repeating robin's response...

however, it doesn't cover the issue i raised. i bolded the bit you (and robin) didn't address.

please note that the law doesn't care about who is depicted - it prohibits computer generated child pornography (irregardless of the age of who is modeling).


from the protect act of 2003
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:SN00885:@@@L&summ2=m&
yes there was a similar law that was repealed in 2002

the protect act of 2003 was signed in 2003

in fact someone has been charged under the 2003 law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwight_Whorley[/quote]




repeat:

in light of protect act of 2003 (specicifcally: Prohibits computer-generated child pornography), what is ll's position on age play?

the topic and related topics were brought up poorly in these two threads:
/108/08/96080/1.html
/108/9e/96084/1.html

however poorly the topic was raised... some clarification on from ll might be useful.

in can you don't know what age play is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ageplay
and related (because of the visual aspect in sl):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lolicon

I'm not familiar with this law, StoneSelf, so I'll have to get a legal opinion. Thanks for bringing this to our attention.

As a preface, I'd note that Linden Lab does not provide legal advice. If you have questions about the legality of your actions under criminal law, or even whether your activities require legal review, you should consult your own qualified counsel.

For your information, and not as legal advice, I can provide the following resources. With respect to the PROTECT Act of 2003, the full text of the Act can be found here: http://judiciary.senate.gov/special/S151CONF.pdf. Relevant background concerning congressional findings for the act begins on page 68 of that document. The Act amends Section 2256 of Title 18 of the United States Code, which you can find here http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002256----000-.html.

Section 2256( reads as follows (emphasis added):

------
( “child pornography” means any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct, where—
(A) the production of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct;
(B) such visual depiction is a digital image, computer image, or computer-generated image that is, or is indistinguishable from, that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or
(C) such visual depiction has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct.
------

In addition, Section 2256(11) defines "indistinguishable" as follows:

------
(11) the term “indistinguishable” used with respect to a depiction, means virtually indistinguishable, in that the depiction is such that an ordinary person viewing the depiction would conclude that the depiction is of an actual minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. This definition does not apply to depictions that are drawings, cartoons, sculptures, or paintings depicting minors or adults.
------

Robin's post, quoted by Torley here - /139/68/96156/1.html#post956775 - is still an accurate statement of Linden Lab policy. To repeat once again: If you are aware of child pornography in Second Life, you are encouraged to contact Linden Lab immediately; we will then act to notify the appropriate authorities. If you wish to report a violation of Community Standards that does not involve illegal activity, you are encouraged to file an abuse report; such a matter would be handled in accordance with normal abuse report procedures.