When did I become sbject to German or Dutch Law?

Hi all,

If I may, I'd like to suggest that much of the driving force behind these actions by SL possibly had far less to do with any particular country's laws then it did the almighty dollar.

Linden Lab has quite a few major corporations present in SL now. They no doubt add a fair amount of income and add a bit of "legitimacy" to SL out in the mainstream world. If these companies were made uneasy by these news reports and expressed that to LL, it would be in LL's best interests as a company to take whatever action they could to make the clients happy.

Cold, hard, fact of business life.

It doesnt matter what countries these acts are played over.. or where the server is... They are using the internet... that is an international connection, the pure evil transmitted between 2 or more people using the internet to carryout these depraved and vile acts, do so using the many nodes that make the internet what it is.

The BIG picture here is, this type of behaviour, whether it is acceptable in the country of origin, or the countries that make the links to a server across the otherside of the world and back... It does and will most certainly effect everyone that has anything to do with Second Life. International opinion will decide whether Second Life is a place or mechanism/platform that is suitable for people to 'play', not individuals.

Unless the majority in Second Life, want it cleanned up and actively seek to make that happen, it will all end... Mute discussions between groups of people arguing one way or another, over issues that effect everyone using Second Life is not going to acheive anthing. Ultimately Goverments will decide whether this place we call our Second Home is fit for its people and close down and shut out its residents from gainning access.. and the cascade will continue until Linden Labs are pressured into closing, then it will be all gone. If Linden Labs can't police this, and they can't, they can only become reactionaries, then it is up to the community.

If ageplay is between 'adults', then why use a child depliction in the action to make it seem real and whole. Sexual acts between Adults isn't the issue here, it is the tools that are being used to recreate an illusion of an Adult and a Child in these acts that is wrong.

I have begun a list of people who I perceive as actively supporting ageplay or sex with minors, I will ban them from my land, I will not do any form of business with them and I will report every instance of this behaviour to Linden Labs. This includes anyone who makes scripted items for that use. I want to be able to use Second Life and I will not tolerate anyone who is going to jepordise that.

I disagree - there are some Objective situations of Morality.

The following are allways immoral - reguardless of subjective intrepations.
- Murder.
- Human Sacrifice.
- Rape.
- Using children for sex.

All of those above have been part of cultural norms (somewhere) and even approved of. But they were not moral , reguardless of what those cultures thought.

Then there are a lot of subjective things that have been called "immoral" based on culture. It could be argued those things arent really immoral at all becuase the basis of them being immoral are arbitrary.

-spitting on the sidewalk
-homosexuality
-marrying someone not from your religeon
-using foul language

They are perhaps "immoral" becuase some book somewhere claims they are but they are not infringing on the humanity of another person.

Thus the second catagory they are subjectively "immoral".

So do you believe that there are no absolute black and white statements over any issue when it comes to morality?

Broccoli

Really? So the difference in how the costume looks is what makes something illegal, not the question whether actual children are molested?

Where do you draw the line? For instance: do you know many porn actresses shave their pussy bald? Why would they do that, you think? Did you know there is a market for adult porn models with virtually non-existing breasts? Why would that be? Where does a petite, thin, breastless porn model with bald genitalia fall on your prohibition scale? Child porn? Or maybe not? And on the other side of the coin: I remember being quite developed when I was as young as thirteen years old, much more developed than that tiny-breasted porn model will ever be. Where did I fall on your prohibition scale? A legal full-grown woman because I had pubic hair and big breasts and a curvy body at that age?

It is not the package that matters. What matters is if there are actual children involved. The petite model with the child's body is not a child. And the busty thirteen year old is. And the child avie with an adult sitting at the screen is not.

Then I guess Linden Labs/Second Life better use US Law - since thats where they are located. People from other countries will have to make sure they are violating their contries laws when participating in Second Life.

If Second Life/ LL was in Germany - then we'd all have to follow German Law inside the game - and those of us in the US would also have to follow US law.

First, you want to be careful with your terminology. A digital image of a minor engaged in a sexual situation, which was created without any aid of using an actual minor, would be protected under the First Amendment.

Second, the First Amendment protects you against action taking against you by the government, whether federal or state. It offers you no protection against a private actor. Linden labs is a private actor, and whatever they do or do not do to restrict depictions of minors in sexual acts on Second Life has no First Amendment implications.

Third, Linden Labs is not subject to any of the other rights in the Bill of Rights, because again, those rights are restrictions on the actions of government against private actors. They do not restrict the actions or private actors with other private actors. Thus, Linden Labs has no duty of providing due process of law. They are subject to the contract in which they enter with you when you join the service.

Fourth, you do enjoy a largely democractic and capitalistic society in the United States. The check on the actions of Linden Labs is competition. If Linden Labs creates bad rules, you can bet that another company is going to spring up to compete with them, luring customers away from Linden Labs on the basis of a better set of rules.

Fifth, it's completely appropriate to complain to Linden Labs about its rules that you don't like. However, arguing your First Amendment rights, or due process, isn't going to get you anywhere, because Linden Labs has no duty to protect those rights.

Sixth, Congress has been making repeated attempts to outlaw digital depiction of minor in sexual acts when no minors were involved at all in the production. The current United States Supreme Court does not look like a collection of staunch defenders of civil rights. If you are concerned, you need to voice your opinions to Congress, not Linden Labs. Otherwise, the whole point will become moot as the United States adopts the same laws that much of Europe already has in freedom-of-expression, or lack thereof, area.



. . .

hmm wonders if it was the actual german reporters posing?

oh well, child pornographers should be drawn and quatered. however, considering that it was a foreign press agent who "found" evidence of such things happening, i wonder if the "reporter" asked if the avatar WAS a child ava or portraying her rl hieght in game?

i wonder how long before other countires jump on board and turn SL into a sterile politically correct clone verse? hears the distant tones of the NIMBY crew........

I would say that is exactly right, something is only wrong because we say it is. Right and wrong are subjective terms. Statements become "black and white" in light of one's personal moral code, without it they are just simply statements.

Morality is learned and to an extent inherited from the social environment one grows up in. We do not have morality genetically hardwired into us, it is an external force. That is why different cultures have different standards, the culture there has developed different laws and social mores. To be "moral" is to abide by the morality of your background not some overriding code that governs all mankind.

I actually don't agree with this. In my book some things are always wrong. Sex with pre-pubescent children for instance. No matter what the ancient Greek thought about it. Only somewhere between 16 and 21 years old is a grey area. Maiming a girl's genitalia (female circumcision) is another good example. Wrong, no matter if there are countries where it is common practise. I am not a cultural relativist.

In the case of ageplay however, no actual child is involved. If there is no child involved, it is not sex with a child, which means this simply doesn't fall under that 'always wrong' category. Ageplay falls under the "it depends on your specific values' category. My specific values are liberal: consenting adults should be allowed to do what they want and share whatever fantasies they want without fear of prosecution. That means I strongly oppose states (especially my own) prohibiting ageplay. In the case of Linden Labs I recognise their right to ban anything from ageplay to barking like a dog, but I would strongly suggest they take a stand against prohibitions of things like ageplay in the spirit of their philosophy: Your World, Your Imagination.

Bold is added by me.

This is my point: in your book. You have your own moral code which you guage things by and on this subject my code happens to agree with yours but morality as a whole is still an arbitrary construct of society. As an example, the conquistadors were appaled by the lack of morals shown by the South American indians whose women bared their breasts and who practiced human sacrifice. I doubt the Indians thought they were doing anything wrong, both cultures had moral codes which had evolved separately and differently.

I'm not trying to condone paedophilia or anything like that at all. I happen to be strongly in the "that's wrong" camp. My concern is with people thinking morality is just something that "is" and not something that is learned.

>>When did I become sbject to German or Dutch Law?

May 2007.





Any way you cut it, this is the new reality.

Were it not for people pushing for absolute total, complete freedom, then abusing that freedom as demonstrated, ironically, we'd have more freedom today.

FYI:

Germans have overtaken Americans as the nationality most likely to be met in the controversial game.

Comscore, a Reston, Virginia based internet research firm, said last week its March tally showed 1.3 million users were 'active' with 209,000 of them from Germany compared to 207 000 from the United States.

This represented an increase of 46 per cent in the number of active 'residents', as the users are called, from January 2007.

In March, 61 per cent of active Second Life residents were from Europe, compared to 19 per cent from North America, and 13 per cent from the Asia Pacific region. In addition, 61 per cent of residents were male while 39 per cent were female.


http://news.monstersandcritics.com/europe/news/article_1301804.php/Concern_grows_in_Germany_at_child_porn_on_Second_Life

So if Germany freaks out and bans SL does that mean more land will open up?


Also, if I remember correctly the depiction of child pornography IS illegal here in the United States.

It is. When a real child was involved in the production. Very much different from two adult-controlled avatars having sex.

This is basically the Cultural Relativist Stance on Morality

Theres some big holes in this concept though:

A couple of examples=

Human Sacrafice in Aztec Culture

The use of girls between 9 and 13 as sexual playthings for unmarried men among certain African tribes.

How could these things ever be Moral? The cant. It doesnt matter what their culture says.

I personally reject the Cultural Reletavist Stance on Morality -
the problem is you can not then try to enforce your own Cultural Relative Culture.

Its the fact that that was done that has made the whole concept survive despite its obvious flaws.

For example when the Spanish found Human sacrifice their response was to impose their own judgement and culture and prejudices on the Aztecs.

Acting to stop Human Sacrifice was understandable - the way they acted was not.

so, by that logic... any greifer you run into is also more likely to be from Germany.

you became subject to linden labs law when you entered the game. when LL says they don´t want ageplay you can cry and bang your head against a wall as long as you want, will not change anything...

it´s soo simple, i don´t see what you are arguing about here

Then place the SL servers in Germany where German Law can apply. And when French residents take the lead move the servers to France, until Japanese residents become the majority and we can follow their laws.......

So you accept that the indians saw nothing wrong in their practice? The Spaniards did, your morality mirrors there own in that regard, and mine too I might add but morality is a majority rules game. Do the african men you mention consider themselves to be doing something wrong? If the majority agree with something, then those that don't are either forced to change their outlook or marginalised until their viewpoint is no longer of consequence. Reason can enter into it, your ego may agree with the super ego but nobody is born with a full grasp of "right and wrong", circumstance, upbringing, peer pressure all contribute to who we are as we grow up. Theft is an outright wrong to some, a nesescary evil to others and a fact of life to others still. You can judge others according to your own standards but not expect them to judge themselves in the same way. Would a child raised in iolation have the same moral code as one raised in a western/christian environment, for that matter would one raised in an eastern/islamic? In today's world we all share a great deal with regards to morality, but I don't think that because we agree we should then assume that its just something that is, it was brought about through communication and social integration.

I studied the subject during my time at university and so I am predisposed to question any arbitrary system, nevertheless its a subject I find fascinating.

LL never said they didn't want ageplay. Just that it couldn't be advertised. Just like they didn't ban gambling, just the advertising of it.

i think they just did in the blog today (at least to me it sounds like they just sayd that in the blog)

The only reason I added that was to reflect my knowledge of the fact that some may disagree with me. I am not a cultural relativist, but I can hardly claim nobody is a cultural relativist. That would simply be untrue. Be that as it may, I certainly don't agree with cultural relativism. While some moral questions may be a matter of taste or culture, some things are just wrong. Usually things where a victim is involved. Nudity for instance doesn't harm anybody, so the way nudity is regarded morally is a question of taste and culture. Sex with a prepubescent child harms the child, which is a reason why the issue moves from a matter of taste to or culture to just being plain wrong.

Cultural relativism opens the door to indifference. If morals are a question of culture, why should we strive to end slavery worldwide? If it is acceptable in other cultures, it is non of our business, right? Why would we strive to end female circumcision? Apparently it is perfectly acceptable in certain cultures, so who are we to impose our values? I don't want to fall into that pit-fall. I think there are certain rights that should be available to everybody on the planet. I think everybody should have personal freedom, not just people who are born at the right side of a border. I think every girl should be protected against genital maiming and every child protected against sexual assault, not just those who happen to live in my own little protected enclave. To adopt a cultural relativist standpoint, knocks out the moral grounds on which you can strive to end injustice from under you.