When did I become sbject to German or Dutch Law?

I'm an American citizen. I was born here, I have rights here, and aside from a couple of very short vacations, I have lived here my entire life. I pay my taxes, I vote, and I am entitled to due process under the law.

Last I heard.

In the Unites States, virtual depictions of Child Pornorgraphy are NOT illegal. (I'm sure others in the know can cite case law to prove it. I can't... but that doesn't make it false).

Works of fiction are protected under the First amendment. The actions of two consenting adults, engaging in consented-tol acts... has been uphelp in the courts quite recently. The onus of protecting children has been moved away from Internet content providers by the courts, very recently as well...

That is, of course, in the United States... where I.. and Linden Labs live.

I am not going to engage in the ususal forum bullshit where we all accuse each other of this, or that. This is about American Civil Liberties and Electronic Freedoms. You can label me a pedophile for standing up for people's rights. If you elect to.. I will be quite pleased to see you in court for Slander.

This is about the right to pretend.

Linden Labs has stated, for themselves, that they banned people from the service without even the slightest due process. In fact, they determined that both participants involved in an act, NOT banned by any form of the Terms of service or Community Standards, were over the age of consent. No warnings were issued, no arguments heard. These people were deprived of property.. (inventory, intellectual property, usage rights on previously agreed to contracts on other people's intellectual properties, use of paid for land holdings, etc etc etc... For a violation of a rule which heretofore did not exist.

I am not a German citizen. I do not live there, and as such, I am NOT subject to it's laws. if I were... then there are quite a few countries in which I would already be worthy of the death penalty, simply for the crime of being homosexual.

I am deeply concerned about the precident this sets. DEEPLY CONCERNED. whose laws with Linden Labs cow-tow to next? will it be a country with strict laws against BDSM? or a country with laws against sex slavery?

You can laugh now.. and say that's unreasonable...

Linden Labs has just proven that they do not respect the legal rights of people living in this country. Only their personal moral codes, and public relations issues. What happens when the Germans hate Loli's or Demons or Goths? what happens when the Germans hate BDSM or homosexuals or Jews... or Fascists?

Will LL knuckle under again and bow down before Germany? Holland? France? China? Pakistan? Iran?

I know that LL is a company, and is within their rights to make whatever rulings they want to on any matter... even to ban me and all people who raise a hand, daring to be concerned about this action.

But this sets a dangerous precedent, that scares me deeply... because the actions I engage in, both in SL and RL.. are illegal in many countries around the world.

And today, LL just advertised that they will submit to pressure from any press corps or legal system on the planet.

Are you next?

I remember hearing someone once say that World War Three would be blood-less.

added: The so-called 'freedom of the press' is a misnomer ... read untamed, ruthless power of the press

While you may not be subject to German or Dutch law, unless you chose to visit there, your presence and actions in LL is subject to LL's 'laws'.

If LL decide to include laws of other countries it is marketing to, they are perfectly entitled to. In most of Europe it seems virtual paedophilia is illigal, if people want to product and have cyber sex as an adult with a child, surely it is turning them on, or why would they do it?

I have read here several times that LL is opening offices in the UK, that would make them an international company and fall under UK law.

What is the alternative? All European countries block SL? Over half the grid would be gone overnight.

Have you, or any of your virtual friends, family, canine and feline ever had a sexual or otherwise encounter with another individual(s) who asserted an age under 18 or you asserted an age under 18? If so then you might be guilty.

I don't think you are subject to German or which other countries laws. It LL's decision to react on what is handed to them... So you should be with LL for this one in my opinion.

Morwen.

PS: Nearly missed the Godwin... never fails in a thread like this.

Should LL enforce the laws of other country's?

1. It's illegal to even depict any sexual acts in some country's.
2. It's illegal to even talk about politics in other country's.

To quote.
You did nothing when they came for them.
You did nothing when they came for me.
Who will be there when they come for you?

Should LL enforce the laws of other country's?

1. It's illegal to even depict any sexual acts in some country's.
2. It's illegal to even talk about politics in other country's.

To quote.
You did nothing when they came for them.
You did nothing when they came for me.
Who will be there when they come for you?

--
I think SL needs to be split up into different continents so each sim states what country it belongs to.

That way Germans have to come into the USA sims if they want to see legally depicted age play.

Doh.. also failed to see neo-con push the idea of Iran lumped up in this somehow. Yeah blame Iran. They are teh evil. Child Porn not legal there? Oh noes, they are teh evil. Posting in Godwin'ed and Iran'ed thread.

Personally I find the very concept of child pornography thoroughly disgusts me, and the idea of someone roleplaying it makes me go "Ewww."

But at the same time, the very concept of having sex with another man thoroughly disgusts me, and the very idea of watching two men have sex also makes me go "Ewww."

Of course, You might see a difference, in that child pornography is illegal, and homosexual behaviour is not. You'd be wrong, homosexual behaviour IS illegal in many places. And to argue that one is more morally reprehensible than the other - well, again, that's subjective.

Actual child pornography is one thing. Child roleplaying is something entirely different. Just because I don't personally "get" it does not make it illegal. Well, maybe in Germany, but as Winter pointed out, laws are different everywhere.

The fact is that these were two consenting adults roleplaying - as Winter put it, it's about the right to pretend. I agree wholeheartedly with Winter's interpretation of this. Linden got some bad press, and in fear of it blossoming out of control, they took extreme measures, despite the fact is that these are adults, and there were no actual children involved.

I saw a lot of responses to the blog that said, in effect, ban all child avatars, there is no good reason, nobody should be allowed to play a child, etcetera.

While I personally don't play a child avatar, while I personally find many of the child avatars I have encountered in the game to be, frankly, annoying in their childishness, and while I personally am more than a bit creeped out by the concept of an adult pretending to be a child in general, I think it's ludicrous to suggest that people should be restricted in this manner.

Many people hate furry avatars, perhaps those should be banned as well. What about women with male genetalia? I see those often enough on Second Life. I'm sure there are lots of people who would love to see those go away as well. How about giant prim genetalia and breasts? How about banning all avatars with brown hair?

I'm talking in extremes here, but there are clearly people on SL who THINK in extremes. I agree with the poster who said we actually need more flexibility in avatar size, not less. I'm uncomfortable with any changes that affect what I am allowed to be on Second Life (remember, it's Your World, Your Imagination), whether it actually affects something I personally want to do or not.

As I say, I don't personally like it, I don't personally understand it. But I don't personally want to add more restrictions to the supposedly boundless world of Second Life. There are more boundaries being erected every day it seems.

Ah so not only age verification, but complete identity verification is what you want?

Morwen.

... except that the world isn't america, and america doesn't own the internet.

You clearly miss the whole point. This isn't about 'virtual' child porn, it's ACTUAL child porn images being passed around - and if you watch the interview with Robin, you see a shocked look on her face when they show her what's on the laptop and she says "those aren't avatars".

Let's be very very clear here; "ageplay", or roleplaying children, is very very seperate than ageplay with sexual content involved.

Under US law, "virtual" is legal, "real" is not. Under German law, neither are legal. Therefore, as it *was* real images being passed around, even if you disregard the German aspect it is clearly against US law.

Even if it's legal, it doesn't make it right or acceptable. It's a very fine line between saying "this isn't wrong" and supporting paedophila.

When you have an international game, I'm afraid you cannot inflict the laws and standards of the US on everyone - especially as from LL's own statistics, only around 25% of the playerbase is from the US. There are no "rules" for cyberspace because, as a country, it doesn't exist - yet it affects us all.

Let's also remember that child porn is NOT a Second Life problem - it's an online problem, caused by a small minority of individuals wherever many gather together.

Broccoli

Personally, I have not seen this video you're talking about. The blog post specifically states that nobody has specifically shown Linden where any actual child porn exists on SL, so I'm not sure what you're referencing.

I wholeheartedly agree... if ACTUAL child porn was involved... HOWEVER...



Point blank... Two avatars ... engaged in depicted sexual conduct... immediately banned from Second Life.

As a side note: in Holland only the lifelike depiction of child porn is illegal. This means a photoshopped image of child porn that can not be distinguished from actual child porn is illegal, but for instance manga art depicting young girls in sexual positions is not. This law is only in effect because otherwise the burden of proving a picture is real and not altered to look like child porn would rest on the prosecution when someone is charged with possesion of child porn. Rule of thumb: if it looks like an actual child was molested, it's illegal.

There are those in the Netherlands who would like to stretch the law to include prohibition of depiction of 'child porn' (actually ageplay) in SL, possibly by starting a trial to provide jurisprudence. There are also those in the Netherlands who are strongly opposed to this, both because of the way it is done (proper procedure would be to pass a new law, this 'stretching' of the interpretation of a law by trying to get a conviction is not normal procedure here) and because it infringes on the freedom of consenting adults do do as they like as long as nobody is harmed or inconvenienced.

not really. only one of those practices involves two consenting adults, and doesn't involve a victim.

more disturbing news

http://news.portalit.net/fullnews_YouTube-Sued-By-Thai-Government_2574.html
"Insulting the monarch is still considered as a serious crime in Thailand and can be punishable with up to 15 years of imprisonment."
"Back in March, a Swiss citizen was accused of vandalizing portraits of the king and sentenced for 10 years in jail."

This is a crime in UK too. And that news is old. The king pardoned the swiss guy. Old news is old and non-relevant.

What Robin should have stated was the nationality of both individuals. If they were both German and doing something that German authorities would deem illegal, then I don't see anything wrong with LL banning them solely for avatar sex. SL isn't a safe heaven for doing things that are illegal in *your own* country.

If they were both residents in a country where avatar sex isn't a crime, then you do have a problem and the precedent is set.

I don't agree with (insert simulated activity here), (simulated activity) is a crime when committed in RL so (activity) should be banned.

But the point is that the "depiction" of child pornography that was involved in this case DID involve two consenting adults, and no victims. there is no question of there being a victim in actual child pornography, of course the child is a victim. But that's not what's being debated here.



I considered that as well, but that would compromise the identity of the two people involved, I'm sure that's why it was not mentioned.

Two for the price of one

They haven't shown "where" child porn exists - not that it does exist. Subtle but different. They are not denying it existed in SL, they just don't have the location.

Look at this video clip: http://youtube.com/watch?v=Wk8uNWF77gg - the original German news report

Around 5 mins 50, the interview with Robin Linden - she clearly looks shocked and says "those are not avatars", which can be heard even without the German translation over it. Just after for the next 10 seconds are some partly blurred out images of what I would assume to be one of the images referenced - clearly still child porn and totally illegal.

Broccoli

I am not upset about the "subsequent interview".. I am upset about the banning of the avatars mentioned in the blog.

Apples to oranges.

German news agency says "these are people on your service, and their avatars engaged in sex. SL bans them immediately.

Subsequent video, German news agency shows SL real world child porn, but will not give the source or location where these images originated from.. thus they cannot even be traced to individuals in SL.

You can't take this as ONE incident... it's two. The second... real child porn = bad.. that's pretty much universal around the world. (especially in the US where LL legally exists)... but the first: "two avatars, one that resembled an adult male and another that resembled a child, engaged in depicted sexual conduct.".... neither violates United States law, nor in fact any section of the TOS/CS.

That's the one that recieved immediate bannings.

At about 3:45 on that video, um the guy who is filming this is having sex with a virtual child too. I like duh?! ... ?!

What that video does show, is not two people having sex together, but several people involved. It looks like a club where child avs are there specifically for paedophiles to come for their kicks.

A while back, Linden Lab made a policy statement in the form of a notecard, banning age play of a sexual nature. This has nothing at all to do with the laws of any country, or the freedoms a citizen of any given country might enjoy, such as freedom of speech here in the United States. It is simply policy that we, as residents, must adhere to as a condition of participating in Second Life.

I agree with Winter, in principle. I depart from that view the moment we arrive inside the domain of Linden Lab policy, which occurs the moment we log in to the website or to the grid. Our free speech rights granted us by the 1st Amendment here in the US do not fully extend into the virtual world of Second Life.

I think Linden Lab are pretty liberal when it comes to freedom of expression in the form of content we create, or activities we engage in. Those freedoms must remain as unrestricted as possible for the community to thrive, and for us to truly make this world our own.

Sometimes though, lines must be drawn. Notwithstanding corporate image and reputation, which absolutely must be preserved and protected, I take my involvement in this community very seriously, and very personally, and support any effort to prevent its reputation from being spoiled by creeps who choose to act out demented fantasies involving sex with children.

Zaphod

as far as I can see.. the club shown has done EVERYTHING it can to obey the TOS. there's a huge warning sign on the front door. which the reporter walks right past. There's another sign on the wall stating that all pictures (presumably on the walls) are 18 and over. This happened inside an enclosed space, presumably on mature rated land... and unless the reporter was actually involved in the acts... he was camming through walls to get a look at people engaged in private acts in a private space. Those people (as LL has ststaed) were BOTH over the age of consent... and were banned anyways.

As for the content of the video, I can't say. it's in German. They appear to be talking a lot about socks (hosen). The tone of the piece suggests to me that it's a "wide reaching expose" of generally abhorrent-to-germans behaviour within second life.

The adults engaged in roleplaying were banned.

The people circulating actual RL child porn.... we have no information, and LL claims that the german media did not provide the actual images so they could be traced.