Jump to content

Is SL's adult content the next to go ?


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 63 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, AnnabelleApocalypse said:

Also, they did try the "PG-13" route with Sansar, and we all know what a flaming dumpster fire that turned out to be :ph34r:

very few people know what a flaming dumpster fire that was, dozens maybe .. 

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

51 minutes ago, AnnabelleApocalypse said:

Onlyfans banning adult content is like Mcdonalds banning burgers. I am baffled as to what they think they will be selling afterwards.

As for LL going down that route - there are a growing number of "metaverses" operating on blockchain tech these days (decentraland, cryptovoxels, somnium space to name 3 I am aware of). 

Its all very much in its infancy, but its not hard to picture someone making "un-censorable crypto sexy fun-time world". 

I think both decentraland and somnium space need to do a little work on their avatars first

35f0b952f23089411a40eb6c56370eae.jpg

 

And also (can't upload this, so you'll have to click to see what somnium avs look like)

https://i.gyazo.com/d4029110414b9b85d1df03128258d191.mp4

  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Innula Zenovka said:

 

I think both decentraland and somnium space need to do a little work on their avatars first

35f0b952f23089411a40eb6c56370eae.jpg

 

And also (can't upload this, so you'll have to click to see what somnium avs look like)

https://i.gyazo.com/d4029110414b9b85d1df03128258d191.mp4

Holy missing geometry, Batman!  What are they targeting as a client platform?  Mobile phones?!?!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, AnnabelleApocalypse said:

Its all very much in its infancy

As I noted :P nor am I saying these places will be the next big thing. Decentralands "thing" seems to be large scale events like concerts in VR. So the avis have to be pretty basic by necessity.

My point was "super sexy crypto fun time world" may not be too far in the future. Metaverse start-ups are a dime a dozen again these days.

Take something like virt-a-mate (which already has avi customization waaaaaaaaaayyyyyy in advance of SL and was developed by one person), give it a few extra functions, stick it on a blockchain and bam.

Edited by AnnabelleApocalypse
Link to comment
Share on other sites

SL's biggest advantage is the content. I feel like so much of it is adult related that getting rid of it entirely would make it easier for other worlds to compete, especially if they offered adult content. Unfortunately, I do think a lot of these clamp downs on adult content regarding real life people involve underage people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The original post asked "Should we be worried?" about LL limitiing adult content.

I think not, for now. The Gatcha banning might be a red flag, as it implies that the legal dept must have some sway.  I speculate  they argued that banning Gatcha would save them some money, as there is an expense in dealing with the regulatory climate and Gatcha likely provides negligable income to LL.

One could argue that if lawyers and accountants are running the show at LL, maybe they will decide that  LL needs to cover their butt by removing all adult content. That seems a bit crazy, as it would clearly have a significant impact on revenue and the compliance problem would be huge (and expensive).

Linden Lab has taken pains to manage adult content via the region rating system (and policies) and age verifcation. We trust that all adult content in Second Life is legal so there is no legal requirement to shut it down (as there was with casino gambling).

Second Life will evolve and the proportion of adult content may diminish or increase, who knows. When people hear I spend alot of time in Second Life they always ask  "What do you do?"  I answer that everything people do in real life, they do in Second Life, just with nicer clothes :) I am hoping that will continue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, ValKalAstra said:

that Viewer Developers will suddenly add options for local texture and animation replacement system (think modding tools)

If you aren't familiar with what the TPVs have to adhere to in order to even connect to the grid, you might want do so and focus on the parts that talk about shared experience(s). Approved TPVs can't just sneak something into their viewers without risking being banned from the grid. 

LL has been down this road already.

 

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AnnabelleApocalypse said:

virt-a-mate

As far as I can see it only does single-person experiences. The second you add more than two~3 avatars it's probably going to chug, and taking it to an online interactive experience would add a whole load more complexity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Sid Nagy said:

If sex isn't a big thing in SL, why is it so hard then to find PG only furniture?
The sex stuff is everywhere, in kitchens, chairs, beds, fireplaces, rugs, bars, walls, tables, side tables, lamps, barbecues, tents, office furniture ....
It is far more than the nightclubs and Zindra stuff. It is on almost every residential plot.

Banning sex would be the most extreme shot in the own foot the lab could come up with.

I don't seem to have trouble finding PG versions of the "adult" furniture. And as long as the PG rated stuff is mod you can always add the adult stuff. Or take the adult stuff out like I do. So, I'm not seeing a problem since most good creators allow mod and offer both PG and Adult versions. 

If LL were to ban sex, it would just go underground/black market. Humans don't stop doing things they know they shouldn't. They just hide it better. Which is the whole point. If it's hidden, it went away, and everyone goes about their merry way ignoring the elephants in the room and the skeletons in the closet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Quistess Alpha said:

As far as I can see it only does single-person experiences. The second you add more than two~3 avatars it's probably going to chug, and taking it to an online interactive experience would add a whole load more complexity.

Probably. And that is the fine line any service that goes down the "adult metaverse" path would have to balance.

Look too much like Decentraland and nobody will want to use it for pixel-bumping.

Look too much like Virtamate and many will want to use it, but nobody will be able to.

Dont get me wrong, LL/SL are miles ahead in this regard. Mostly due the the sheer volume of user content.

What I am saying is should LL be silly enough to ever try to ban adult content, the possibility of a competitor eating their lunch is much higher than it was 5-10 years ago.

Edited by AnnabelleApocalypse
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Innula Zenovka said:

I don't think their performers' tax affairs are likely to be a matter of particular concern to them.

The concept is identical. We upload content, LL hosts it and facilitates transactions.

LL has a system in place to make sure we're paying taxes. Remember how upset everyone got when tax id and forms were required here?

OnlyFans does the same, except they're making much, much more money.

If LL is worried about taxes, it makes sense that the processing companies involved with OF would be too.

Edited by Paul Hexem
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ardy Lay said:

Holy missing geometry, Batman!  What are they targeting as a client platform?  Mobile phones?!?!

I think that's purposeful.

All of these 'other options' seem to go cartoony as a way to avoid the 'adult' crowd. Not that that stops people. There's also the way it helps avoid 'uncanny valley' concerns. And a more cartoony face can more easily be 'universally pan-ethnic'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Paul Hexem said:

The concept is identical. We upload content, LL hosts it and facilitates transactions.

LL has a system in place to make sure we're paying taxes. Remember how upset everyone got when tax id and forms were required here?

OnlyFans does the same, except they're making much, much more money.

If LL is worried about taxes, it makes sense that the processing companies involved with OF would be too.

LL don't have a system to make sure I'm paying my taxes, of course, because I'm a Brit, but I don't see it.

I mean, it doesn't really matter to HM Revenue and Customs why people are sending me money via my PayPal account (or my OnlyFans Account, or Patreon, or GoFundMe or whatever) so long as I declare it as taxable income, any more than it matters to them whether I make  my money selling content in SL or selling widgets on eBay or singing madrigals on OnlyFans.

OnlyFans have been forced into this by Mastercard and Visa, who threatened to fire them as customers if didn't tone down the sex side of the business.    It's nothing to do with tax.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Innula Zenovka said:

OnlyFans have been forced into this by Mastercard and Visa, who threatened to fire them as customers if didn't tone down the sex side of the business.    It's nothing to do with tax.

Given that Visa and Mastercard are fine with processing payments to explicitly sexual sites (EX. Clips4Sale.com) I have to immagine there was more nuance, the 'threat' was probably more along the lines of "If you host/facilitate sex stuff you need to do XYZ and be explicit about it" rather than "tone down all the sex stuff or else".

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Quistess Alpha said:

Given that Visa and Mastercard are fine with processing payments to explicitly sexual sites (EX. Clips4Sale.com) I have to immagine there was more nuance, the 'threat' was probably more along the lines of "If you host/facilitate sex stuff you need to do XYZ and be explicit about it" rather than "tone down all the sex stuff or else".

I think the inherent problem of hosting a site like OnlyFans is the same one any form of social media faces -- how on earth do you police it, given that a proportion of the content people upload is bound to be pretty extreme, and probably unlawful in several jurisdictions?     That, in turn, is bound to make payment  processors nervous both because of what they perceive as possible reputational damage but also possible criminal liability .

I can well imagine OnlyFans deciding that they've had a long and successful run, making scads of money in the process, so they'll fold at this point, and carry on promoting their non-sex channels, and trying to build that.

Doubtless sex workers making content for OnlyFans will do what they've had to do time and again, as various other content sharing services have become successful as hosts for sexual content and then, after the sites have made bank for a few years, dropped that kind of content.   That is, they'll find a new hosting service, and that'll last a few years, and then they'll have to find another one.

 

 

 

Edited by Innula Zenovka
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to Newsweek.... "Mastercard's decision was lobbied for by Conservative groups such as National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE), formerly known as Morality in Media, and Exodus Cry.

They have been targeting payment processors and credit card companies that work alongside pornographic sites, under the guise of abolishing sex trafficking and exploitation.

When news of OnlyFans' ban broke, NCOSE released a statement explaining: "The announcement made by OnlyFans that it will prohibit creators from posting material with sexually explicit conduct on its website comes after much advocacy from NCOSE, survivors and allies."

The Wikipedia entry on NCOSE says... "The National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE), formerly organized as Morality in Media (MIM) before changing its structure, is an American non-profit known for its anti-pornography stance and anti-sex trafficking advocacy based on abolitionist principles.[1][2] When it was MIM, versions of the group once campaigned against obscenity, sex shops and sex toys, decriminalization of sex work, comprehensive sex education, and various works of literature or visual arts the organization has deemed obscene, profane or indecent.[3] The group was started as a part of the religious right and primarily Catholic."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Innula Zenovka said:

OnlyFans have been forced into this by Mastercard and Visa, who threatened to fire them as customers if didn't tone down the sex side of the business.    It's nothing to do with tax.

 

1 hour ago, Quistess Alpha said:

Given that Visa and Mastercard are fine with processing payments to explicitly sexual sites (EX. Clips4Sale.com) I have to immagine there was more nuance, the 'threat' was probably more along the lines of "If you host/facilitate sex stuff you need to do XYZ and be explicit about it" rather than "tone down all the sex stuff or else".

Yeah. I can buy all sorts of lewd stuff with my credit cards and Paypal, no problem (not that I know this from expeeience, honest!). There's no way that's the only reason.

 

46 minutes ago, Innula Zenovka said:

I think the inherent problem of hosting a site like OnlyFans is the same one any form of social media faces -- how on earth do you police it, given that a proportion of the content people upload is bound to be pretty extreme, and probably unlawful in several jurisdictions?     That, in turn, is bound to make payment  processors nervous both because of what they perceive as possible reputational damage but also possible criminal liability .

On this, we agree.

 

38 minutes ago, diamond Marchant said:

According to Newsweek.... "Mastercard's decision was lobbied for by Conservative groups such as National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE), formerly known as Morality in Media, and Exodus Cry.

They have been targeting payment processors and credit card companies that work alongside pornographic sites, under the guise of abolishing sex trafficking and exploitation.

When news of OnlyFans' ban broke, NCOSE released a statement explaining: "The announcement made by OnlyFans that it will prohibit creators from posting material with sexually explicit conduct on its website comes after much advocacy from NCOSE, survivors and allies."

All sorts of groups lobby for things all the time. Rarely is it the sole reason, or even part of the reason, large corporations make a decision.

And the statement isn't even worth mentioning. You ever see how many pro this or anti that groups make statements claiming credit so they can get more donations, every time a new stupid law is passed?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Innula Zenovka said:

I don't think that analogy works, though.

OnlyFans presumably pay tax on their profits, as do the company's owners.    What people who upload content to the site do with with the 80% of their earnings that OnlyFans pass on to them is presumably their responsibility, just as we, not Linden Lab or Tilia, are responsible for our own tax liability on anything we earn from SL.

I can understand OnlyFans being worried about hosting illegal content or sex workers using the site to advertise their services for in-person meetings, which might or might not land OnlyFans in trouble with the law in particular jurisdictions, but I don't think their performers' tax affairs are likely to be a matter of particular concern to them. 

 

PayPal's new policy makes no mention about taxes. If PayPal began to take on the job of policing taxation for any jurisdiction, there would be no PayPal.

I think you have to stop fixating on OnlyFans, even if that was the original intended target, and read the policy very thoroughly, constantly thinking if it applies to SL. And of course it does. And saying that SL doesn't have "downloadable content" doesn't cut it when you download the browser, the access to much adult content, and download the adult content from the MP, where if you watch the ticker with "What Customers are Buying Now" you'll see adult content of an astoundingly wild diversity is mainly what shows there. In fact, if that disappears tomorrow, we won't be surprised.

I think those with the most stake in adult content need to be going to their Lindens. They have their Lindens, right? I think they must, and have done this already, because this thread is languishing and lurching off topic much of the time, not "hot". Probably the fix is already in, like it wasn't for gatcha. It's terrible to think that big platforms like PayPal now establish norms this way, which is not the rule of law, and not even code-by-law, but tyranny by TOS.

A disclaimer from LL would be "nice to have', "Don't worry, fans, this doesn't apply to SL because [convoluted legal reasoning]". But on a tricky situation like this, the lawyers would likely advise them to say and do nothing at all lest anyone get any ideas that maybe it *should* apply. Too bad this wasn't done for gatcha.

The religious right is not made up of "Catholics" many of whom are liberals, but only some Catholics, and it's more about born-again Christian denominations. Anyone who has actually worked on the issue of trafficking as I have knows their statistics are very skewed and hyped, although of course it is a valid concern for this country and others and "sex workers' rights" does not resolve the issue entirely.

Edited by Prokofy Neva
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Paul Hexem said:

Yeah. I can buy all sorts of lewd stuff with my credit cards and Paypal, no problem (not that I know this from expeeience, honest!). There's no way that's the only reason.

Yes, but there's also all sorts of stuff that's rather more than simply lewd available, and that people normally have to buy using bitcoin on the dark web, and sometimes lands them in court if it's found on their computers,  and it looks as if the payment processors were dissatisfied with OnlyFans' efforts to keep that kind of material off the site.

OnlyFans, for their part, presumably decided that that moderation just wouldn't work, at least not at the kind of level they were prepared to provide  so they decided to cut their losses and get out of the market completely.

As I understand the story, had there been an affordable way for OnlyFans to restrict their content to material that was simply lewd, then there wouldn't be a problem, since we already know that payment processors are quite OK with lewd material.

It used to be part of my job to know about what's legal and what isn't at least broadly, and the stuff that's illegal is something that most people really wouldn't want to watch.   Nevertheless, there's a mindboggling large market for it, and producers will try to supply that market any  way they can.

As to online sex workers, I think that's a separate issue, and that they've been caught up in measures that aren't specifically aimed at them.   

I wish they did have an online environment in which they can safely advertise their services, and maybe someone will come up with a commercially viable solution.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Prokofy Neva said:

And of course it does. And saying that SL doesn't have "downloadable content" doesn't cut it when you download the browser, the access to much adult content, and download the adult content from the MP, where if you watch the ticker with "What Customers are Buying Now" you'll see adult content of an astoundingly wild diversity is mainly what shows there.

Look at this from the point of view of the prosecutor.

In order to bring a case, you have to be able to say to the jury, this is what we say the defendant did, contrary to section whatever of such and such an act, these are the points the law says, before you can convict,  we must prove to you so you are sure they are true, and this is how will prove all that.

I used to have to know about this for my job in the UK, and I can tell you the kind of evidence the prosecutor needs for a conviction on particular charges.  If the material is found on the defendant's computer, then the prosecution has, if necessary, to be able to show the images to the jury, and say "this is what we found, and these are the particular characteristics that make it illegal".  Similarly, if the prosecutor can prove the defendant visited particular urls, then the prosecution has a different set of things to prove, but one way or another, to get a conviction, the prosecution has to have some images, or some equivalent form of evidence, to show the jury.

Other than the last location image, where would the prosecutor find something to show the jury to prove any particular point about their activities in SL? I can't think of anything they'd find, either on someone's computer or their chat logs, unless they'd been particularly careless with screenshots and video recordings.

 

Edited by Innula Zenovka
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Innula Zenovka said:

Look at this from the point of view of the prosecutor.

In order to bring a case, you have to be able to say to the jury, this is what we say the defendant did, contrary to section whatever of such and such an act, these are the points the law says, before you can convict,  we must prove to you so you are sure they are true, and this is how will prove all that.

I used to have to know about this for my job in the UK, and I can tell you the kind of evidence the prosecutor needs for a conviction on particular charges.  If the material is found on the defendant's computer, then the prosecution has, if necessary, to be able to show the images to the jury, and say "this is what we found, and these are the particular characteristics that make it illegal".  Similarly, if the prosecutor can prove the defendant visited particular urls, then the prosecution has a different set of things to prove, but one way or another, to get a conviction, the prosecution has to have some images to show the jury.

Other than the last location image, where would the prosecutor find something to show the jury to prove any particular point about their activities in SL? I can't think of anything they'd find, either on someone's computer or their chat logs, unless they'd been particularly careless with screenshots and video recordings.

 

Funny how you "have to know about this for my job in the UK" and have interpreted *this topic* in this way. But you didn't for gatcha. Interesting, that.

I'm SO GLAD you raised the importance of prosecutorial evidence. One could mention the point of adversarial defense, of which you have less in the UK compared to what we have in the US. 

PayPal didn't make any statement about lootboxes. But they did about adult content.

And this statement isn't about "where you have been". It's about the nature of downloadable content, and whether it is adult in the meaning PayPal wishes it to mean, which has not yet been tested in US courts -- and will be -- which is why they left themselves some leg room about "art" and all that.

And you never raised "where you've been" and URLs and screenshots, although you would that to prosecute a case against an SL resident in Japan or UK too. You'd have to prove they played a gatcha machine and got the gatcha in their inventory not from a resale but from pulling a machine. So you are QUITE sure that test was going to be met??

Edited by Prokofy Neva
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Prokofy Neva said:

. It's about the nature of downloadable content, and whether it is adult in the meaning PayPal wishes it to mean, which has not yet been tested in US courts -- and will be -- which is why they left themselves some leg room about "art" and all that.

And what downloadable content do you there is that a prosecutor might ask a court in the US to consider about someone's actual activities in SL?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 63 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...