Linden Lab is building a NEW virtual world

[Gavin Hird]

In this case it is the government protecting the consumer from entering unreasonable contracts. Frankly I see no harm in that. 

Tough luck doing the same as a citizen on your own. ;-)

[Thomas Galbreus]

---

Freya Mokusei wrote:

they wouldn't disallow anything that is currently legal

---

It may well be that with Hillary Clinton a declared feminist will be president by then. Many feminists have an anti-porn stance, and with good reason. I wouldn't be surprised if at least effecitive age verification gets written into the US law, making the current situation in SL illegal also in the US. I might write HC an e-mail. ;-)

[Thomas Galbreus]

---

Freya Mokusei wrote:

---

the nonsense law regarding German users (I've not seen any source for it aside from the one Perrie translated about IP addresses) and age-verification

---

http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stgb/__184d.html

http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stgb/__184.html

[Monalisa Robbiani]

Sighs. I get a little annoyed by your personal crusade against porn and "kinks" you personally don't like and/or refuse to understand. A few decades ago, people said the same things about gays ... I don't think that this forum is the right place to discuss your personal issues about OTHERS' private lives.

 

If porn is bad or not is totally irrevelant for the question about how a future virtual world should handle the issue. It's a simple marketing decision and nothing else.

 

BTW, i consider myself a feminist and I am not against porn ...

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

---

Freya Mokusei wrote:

they wouldn't disallow anything that is currently legal

---

It may well be that with Hillary Clinton a declared feminist will be president by then. Many feminists have an anti-porn stance, and with good reason. I wouldn't be surprised if at least effecitive age verification gets written into the US law, making the current situation in SL illegal also in the US. I might write HC an e-mail. ;-)

---

http://adobochronicles.com/2014/06/10/amazon-goofs-sends-porn-video-to-online-purchasers-of-hillary-clintons-new-book/

And for real...

http://www.ibtimes.com/former-hillary-clinton-intern-turned-porn-star-292335

[Freya Mokusei]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stgb/__184d.html

http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stgb/__184.html

---

Much appreciated, thank you.

These confirm to me that they only affect local citizens and businesses, those within Germany (for non-German readers, they're published by the German Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection - jurisdiction, Germany). I don't see anything in them about specific methods of age verification or the intent to turn them into EU law. I also don't see anything in them that would affect Linden Lab operations in the US or EU (as a whole), now or in the future.

Without a more thorough reading I wouldn't like to say whether it could potentially affect Germany-based SL residents. My inclination is that that's neither within the scope nor the capability for this document and its originating office. It seems unlikely that individuals acting non-commercially, through a US-based online service would be liable directly as a result of these laws.

P.S./Off topic: I'm sure you're aware that Feminism is a complex banner, and many segments of 'declared' Feminists are sex-positive and/or porn-positive. I leave the imaginary governance potential of the USA up to the corporations that control it.

[Thomas Galbreus]

---

Freya Mokusei wrote:

---

. I don't see anything in them about specific methods of age verification

---

The details were worked out by the courts. Here is a court decision that deals with it:

http://juris.bundesgerichtshof.de/cgi-bin/rechtsprechung/document.py?Gericht=bgh&Art=en&Datum=Aktuell&nr=43444&linked=urt&Blank=1&file=dokument.pdf

Summary of that:

http://juris.bundesgerichtshof.de/cgi-bin/rechtsprechung/document.py?Gericht=bgh&Art=en&Datum=Aktuell&nr=41423&linked=pm

[Freya Mokusei]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

http://juris.bundesgerichtshof.de/cgi-bin/rechtsprechung/document.py?Gericht=bgh&Art=en&Datum=Aktuell&nr=43444&linked=urt&Blank=1&file=dokument.pdf

http://juris.bundesgerichtshof.de/cgi-bin/rechtsprechung/document.py?Gericht=bgh&Art=en&Datum=Aktuell&nr=41423&linked=pm

---

Thanks for these, too. They're proving harder for me to read unfortunately, but my assumption here is that the court case discusses two competing standards? Both implemented by German companies, for access to inside-the-country material? What it terms 'foreign offers' are excluded.

Please correct me if I'm mistaken.

[Perrie Juran]

---

Gavin Hird wrote:

In this case it is the government protecting the consumer from entering unreasonable contracts. Frankly I see no harm in that. 

Tough luck doing the same as a citizen on your own. ;-)

---

Now if the Gov't was protecting consumers from FRAUDELENT contracts I would agree with that.

But if I'm selling a toothbrush with only one bristle and you buy it, as long as I made no false claims about it, it is your responsibilty, not mine or the Gov'ts.

If someone does not like or understand a contract then they should not enter into it.  But if they do then they should take responsibility.

One of the reasons contracts have become so complex is because people are forever trying to get out of them.

We've created our own monster.

 

(Mind you I personally would consider selling a toothbrush to a toothless man kind of low life.  But as my boss once said to me, "Now the man needs dentures to use the brush on.  Go show him our denture collection.  )

[Thomas Galbreus]

---

Monalisa Robbiani wrote:

Sighs. I get a little annoyed by your personal crusade against porn

---

I must also sigh. I pointed out several times that I am not against porn (consumption) as such, only against minors having access, misogynic porn etc.

 

---

Monalisa Robbiani wrote:

A few decades ago, people said the same things about gays

---

I hope in a few decades discriminating and humiliating women will be considered as bad as disicriminating gays is considered now, even in porn.

 

---

Monalisa Robbiani wrote:

and "kinks"

---

I admit I can't see a lifelong unilateral submission and behaviour that publicly displays that as a harmless, joyful kink, but see it as a contradiction to the intrinsic dignity of whichever human being. Please allow me to have my opinion.

 

[Gavin Hird]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

If someone does not like or understand a contract then they should not enter into it.  But if they do then they should take responsibility.

 

---

I am not going to claim that LL's TOS are fraudulent, but many content providers felt that way and left last year. 

Now, in the EU legilsation there is a provision for a consumer contract to be legal to announce any major change to the contract in advance (14 days minimum I think), so the consumer can opt out of it and terminate the contract before the new terms are effective. 

The way LL (and most US comapnies do) is they just spring such changes on you, and if you don't agree there and then you are basically shut out of the service. 

For the content providers in SL this is totally unreasoanable for multiple reasons. The EU provision would let the content provider for which the contract was unreasonable have time to pull all their creations from marketing, back up and delete all their content from stores and inventories, terminate leases and subscriptions, cancel credit card authorizations and transfer their monetary holdings out of SL in a proper manner. They would also have time to say farewell in a proper manner with their friends and contacts. 

This is just one example how the EU provision protects the consumer. 

[Thomas Galbreus]

---

Freya Mokusei wrote:

---

Without a more thorough reading I wouldn't like to say whether it could potentially affect Germany-based SL residents. My inclination is that that's neither within the scope nor the capability for this document and its originating office. It seems unlikely that individuals acting non-commercially, through a US-based online service would be liable directly as a result of these laws.

---

You're wrong here. The law is clear, distributing porn over the internet using whichever service in any form is a crime unless minors are safley excluded from accessing it.

[Freya Mokusei]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

You're wrong here. The [German] law is clear, distributing porn over the internet using whichever service in any form is a crime unless minors are safley excluded from accessing it.

---

Added a limitation to the above, since I still don't see how this affects anyone except German consumers and businesses. I appreciate your feedback, however.

I don't think the German Federal Court has any say in what is considered 'a crime' outside of Germany. I'm still yet to find anything that confirms your claim for companies that are operating within Germany but not situated inside of Germany. I'm also struggling to find non-commercial examples (such as social sending, SnapChat and ChatRoulette, as examples). Maybe you can help point me to these?

What's the definition for "distributing porn" that you're using? Second Life users engaging (publicly or privately, in accordance with ToS, CS and Maturity Ratings) in adult activities doesn't meet my definition.

[Perrie Juran]

---

Gavin Hird wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

If someone does not like or understand a contract then they should not enter into it.  But if they do then they should take responsibility.

 

---

I am not going to claim that LL's TOS are fraudulent, but many content providers felt that way and left last year. 

Now, in the EU legilsation there is a provision for a consumer contract to be legal to announce any major change to the contract in advance (14 days minimum I think), so the consumer can opt out of it and terminate the contract before the new terms are effective. 

The way LL (and most US comapnies do) is they just spring such changes on you, and if you don't agree there and then you are basically shut out of the service. 

For the content providers in SL this is totally unreasoanable for multiple reasons. The EU provision would let the content provider for which the contract was unreasonable have time to pull all their creations from marketing, back up and delete all their content from stores and inventories, terminate leases and subscriptions, cancel credit card authorizations and transfer their monetary holdings out of SL in a proper manner. They would also have time to say farewell in a proper manner with their friends and contacts. 

This is just one example how the EU provision protects the consumer. 

---

Actually we do have laws here that cover this very specific type of thing, the time issue.

 

[Thomas Galbreus]

---

Freya Mokusei wrote:

---

What it terms 'foreign offers' are excluded.

Please correct me if I'm mistaken.

---

The concerning passage in the summary translates (I'll try my best):

 

The BGH (Bundesgerichtshof = Federal Supreme Court) also rejected the argument of the defendant that German offerers of pornographic content would be discriminated compared to foreign offerers by the youth protection regulations. The access restrictions of the German law concerning pornographic content in the internet would basically also apply to foreign offerings that can be accessed inland. The difficulties in law enforcement concerning foreign offerings would not result in a violation of the imperative of equal treatment.

[Freya Mokusei]

Ah yes, my translation was faulty in a few areas there. Thank you for your help!

It seems mostly to be referring to anti-competition and anti-innovation rules (concerns that German business growth will be stifled) - there's no apparent suggestion of taking action against foreign offerings - or, as far as I can see - taking action against non-commercial entities.  Is that a more correct determination?

The definition for "porn distribution" is a little specious at present, though the law seems to call it (via translation) "dissemination". Still a little difficult to determine the reach of such language.

I do begin to see how this could be confusing ground for German citizens, hopefully some sensible compromise can be sought to enable better safety while not also increasing the risk of state-appointed authorisation or data-theft.

[Thomas Galbreus]

---

Freya Mokusei wrote:

there's no apparent suggestion of taking action against foreign offerings - or, as far as I can see - taking action against non-commercial entities.  Is that a more correct determination?

---

You mean actions against Linden Lab as a company? I haven't thought about that. And since I don't get payed for it, I won't start. ;-)

The German criminal law makes no difference between commercial or non-commercial distribution.

[Drake1 Nightfire]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

---

unless minors are safley excluded from accessing it.

---

you mean like their parents actually paying attention to what they do online? See, in the US we leave it up to parents to monitor their children. They way it should be. If i want to let my ten year old watch a horror movie thats rated R who are you to say i can't?

[Amethyst Jetaime]

Your opinion iabout sex in SL is moot because LL has a different opinion and that is the only one that counts.  They are after all a for profit company and if they agreed with you about sex slowing growth in their target market, they'd have gotten rid of it long ago.

As for your arguments about German Laws,  I can't say if what you say is true or not because you have not substantiated your claim.  The links you provided do NOT say it applies to internet sites that originate outside of Germany.  It also says provisions naming some of the places where it did apply were repealed. 

Logically I don't see how a US company physically operating entirely outside of Germany could in any way have to comply with this law. Also logically if the German government were really able and willing to enforce these laws in regards to SL they would have taken steps to do it by now.

The problem is no German court could order LL to do anything to try to enforce a law that strictly applies to Germany only, otherwise the reverse would be true and US Courts could order German companies or people around in Germany in order to enforce US law.  The German police would have to apply to US courts for the legal documents to force LL to give up information on people.  But they'd have to have strong evidence resulting in probable cause.  I doubt any US court is going to cooperate in ordering LL to divulge IP addresses and private information about a group of residents on the off chance that one may be a German minor, particularly if they weren't doing anything else illegal.  Germany could I suppose censor SL so it isn't available to Germans, but we all know that wouldn't be effective as there is ways around it for the determined.

The bottom line is that parents are the ones responsible for watching their children to be sure they don't go on web sites which would be harmful to them.  After all even G rated sites could have sexual deviants lurking for kids.

If by some strange twist that  LL would be liable in any way,  LL could just restrict all German citizens to G rated sims, the same way that they now restrict people that live in places where skill gaming is not legal from going to gaming sims in order to bypass having to comply with the age verification laws of Germany. 

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Just to add that comparisons with Google, Microsoft and Apple aren't particularly useful since they have EU subsidiaries.   Linden Lab doesn't. 

This is why, when Google's European subsidiaries (e.g. google.co.uk)  have to remove search results because people have exercised their "right to be forgotten," the results are still available on google.com, even though that is easily accessed from Europe simply by changing your preferences.

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

Monalisa Robbiani wrote:

Really, that'swhyFacebook,Google, Apple, Disney,flickr, Yahoo,Skype etc. are niche productswhileSL has billions of users, private and corporate. Oh wait, it's the opposite. It's the adult content thatcripplesSL to a niche for "socially inept weirdos" you better not talk about.

---

None of those products are creative virtual worlds.  Those other products aren't even comparable to each other, let alone to SL.   Those are ridiculous ananolgies.

 

I'm not a socially inept weirdo, nor are the people, with which I associate in SL.  On the contrary, they're mostly highly social, educated, and cosmopolitan people in RL...and they happen to also be in SL.    If you identity with the "socially inept weirdo" label, then that's your own personal problem.  (perception)

 

(Edited to note: that Monalisa was making the point of "media", and not herself in her above post.   I shall leave my original comment as worded, but wish to knowledge her point, which she cleared up in subsequent comments)

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

Monalisa Robbiani wrote:

I didn't, that's why I put quotes. It's what the media and the general population thinks aboutSL.

---

I disagree.   The media spits out sensationalism to get readers, viewers, or whatever they need.   But, the general population is savvy enough to know that media distorts, and I really don't think I've seen any media about SL, that wouldn't have generated interest as opposed to non-interest. 

 

 

In other words, the media has helped SL grow, as opposed to not growing.  I think it's a fallacy to asume that SL was going to be the next "big thing" on the web, and if things only were different, there'd be millions more residents here.  I don't think it would have happened, as the nature of SL and this platfrom, will not appeal to the larger populance.  Media be damned.

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

Monalisa Robbiani wrote:

Really, that's whyFacebook,Google, Apple, Disney,flickr, Yahoo,Skype etc. are niche products whileSL has billions of users, private and corporate. Oh wait, it's the opposite. It's the adult content that cripplesSL to a niche for "socially inept weirdos" you better not talk about.

---

None of those products are creative virtual worlds.  Those other products aren't even comparable to each other, let alone to SL.   Those are ridiculous ananolgies.

 

I'm not a socially inept weirdo

, nor are the people, with which I associate in SL.  On the contrary, they're mostly highly social, educated, and cosmopolitan people in RL...and they happen to also be in SL.    If

you

identity with the "socially inept weirdo" label, then that's your own personal problem.  (perception)

 

 

 

---

Wait! When did this happen?

Can we still be friends?!

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

why are you making slurs (hornets) against those who disagree with you?

---

"Stir up a hornets' nest" is a common saying in German ("in ein Wespennest stechen") for causing unexpected, often angry perturbance, not so in English?

---

Yes, we use that phrase in English.   But, you implied that the "hornets" were doing something wrong, when they responded, when it was you who poked them with insults early on in this thread.  

 

 

 

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

I used freedom of speech by expressing my opinion on general behaviours and lifestyles - with Drake1 explicitly asking for it. If people get angry becasue they take part in what I criticize, I can't help it.

---

No one is "explicitly asking for it" when it comes to posting insults to them.   It's just wrong, so don't compromise your character.  (Remember that?  You were concerned about people's charcter.) 

 

I also call BS on your lack of responsibility for people getting angry, when it was in response to your baiting and insulting. 

 

 

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

If someone insulted, it were those who called me "moron", "ass", "troll" etc.

---

Yes, of course, and it was wrong for people to post those things to you.  But, how does that have anything to do with your own behavior?    Other people doing something wrong doesn't excuse you to do it also. 

 

 

 

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

Yes, I tried an Open Sim grid. I have sympathy for Open Sim, and I might investigate further now with the new computer, but at the time it seemed not very lively there, and vehicle scripts were not working very well. I think I like vehicles.

---

Good, there's a lot of fabulous builds out in Open Sim, and in the various grids out on the web.   The lack of population, well there's many factors for that, and it's often discussed.   I also like vehicles, and it's true they don't run as well in OS grids.  But, many of the grids out there are improving, so keep exploring.  (I belong to some science grids, and Sci-Fi roleplay grids, and some others in the larger hypergrid areas.. : )

 

 

 

 

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

And yes, I find having a woman walk around in a slave collar indicates a fragile male ego. If you think that is an insult, report it.

---

First, no one is a slave, unless they're doing some "role-play".  It's mutual and consensual.   Hence no slavery. 

 

Second, most BDSM hasn't nothing to do with slavery, or slaves, and activity prohibits that very thing.   The emphasis on mutually consensual actions for all parties is paramount. Moreso,  than in most vanilla relationships. 

 

You're mistaken as to the "ego" aspect of the men involved.  While it's true that some may have fragile egos, I'd wager that most have healthy, confident egos.  Also, that the healthy confident male egos within the BDSM population is higher than the general population.   (I'm using my own expereince with dominant males in the BDSM culture,  which is anedotal, but it sure beats yours, which I wager is none  ; )