Gavin Hird

Right! As if AR-ing would make any difference! – You must be new here ;-) A child AV is a grown up person trying to shove its roleplay in the face of people who mostly feel uncomfortable about it.

For video conferencing it becomes more of an annoyance than any help unless you are very firmly established inside the platform. The reason being all your tools are outside the platform and people nowadays do this routinely from their mobile devices. Outside of virtual sex (which in itself is a sizeable business case) the business use case are somewhat limited as we speak. I believe there is a market for virtual tourism (both present and historical) and also as a 3D wikipedia type that could let people explore beyond what is possible in a 2D or even traditional multimedia narrative.

Drake1 Nightfire wrote: That being said, there is no reason to prohibit adult content in the new platform. Nor do you have to deal with anything in SL against your will. You choose what you content you can see. No one is shoving anything in your face and saying "LOOK AT THIS PORN!!!" Actually I disagree with that – you too often still see "masters" dragging round their "slaves" in all kinds of wierd configurations where they never should be shoving their lifestyle in your face. The same - and maybe not directly porn - are snotty child avatars who get agressive when you don't want to accept participation in their role play. There are many and a wide range of examples where people inadvertently and early in their introduction to SecondLife are being pushed on "lifestyles" they don't want to deal with, many of which are borderline pornographic or pornographic.

It is interesting you came to that conclution in 2007, because Opensim has it's 7th birthday the weekend at the end of July, and how you possibly could assess the platform for any practical purpose at that time is beyound me. It barely ran at all! ;-)) The main inhibitor to any proliferation in the professional market is severe lack of content. Any business that wants to use it for anything practical have to contract someone for a sizeable period to get content into (purchase and rework) or produce own content. This makes the barrier to entry very high. There are a bunch of other factors, but lack of content is the primary. There is also a general reputation problem where virtual world more often than not is equated with virtual sex.

Monalisa Robbiani wrote: Right now, if you mention SL in a work or business related situation, people either have never heard about it or, if they have, it's like you suggested youporn as a tool or field to look into. It's best not to mention it at all. ^ THIS ^

There is also another aspect of selling the SecondLife v2 in the Apple App store (to use that as an example). If Apple - for any reason - think that you can access adult content via the SLv2 App, they are going to slap on it a 17+ rating and you have effectively killed any family target group. I assume the rules are pretty much the same for Google Play also.

The biggest challenge for a new product that will be available on new platforms, which in reality are mobile platforms, is how do you keep the adult content off the devices of those who are underage. You'd have to have some very strong controls in place to implement this in a (unified) experience. I am sure it is technically possible, but you only need one media breaking story and it could all fall. I have given many reasons in the beginning of this thread why SL (current and new) needs to be broken up in parts to accomodate different legal, cultural and, of course also, the adult content aspects. It is in my view exceedingly difficult to combine these in one experience unless you are to offer a watered down "California dreaming" product that really don't appeal to anyone. The gaming debackle now unfolding is one example of the utter mess different legal realities alone can create.

The question to what extent adult content will exist in the next version of SecondLife is what the target group for the product is. If you are going to cater to tens or millions of users, chances are it will be family oriented, and family oriented and adult content does not mix well. So my prognosis is you will see little of it. Kindoff like what content can be traded on the App store – which happens to originate in California and cater to a 7+ audience. ...I think most western Europeans find the current "adult" content policy hopelessy dated and prudish; full of double standards I don't even think we have had here – ever.

Innula Zenovka wrote: Gavin Hird wrote: Perrie Juran wrote: The requirements for an affidavit will vary by State in the U.S. and I'd have no idea what it is for other Countries. That is a question that needs answered by LL. Wouldn't it have to fulfill the requirements of California law for it to be recognized in a Californian court. California law is the governing law of the general TOS, so I suppose that applies to these filings as well. – Just my L$1, but yeah, LL must clarify. The point about affidavits is that making one that contains a statement you know to be false, or think might be, is normally an offence in the jurisdiction where you swear it. Presumably the point of having applicants swear an affidavit is to discourage them from lying in their descriptions of how the apparatus works and, if necessary, to demonstrate to the relevant US authorities that LL have done all they can to ensure that applicants tell the truth, rather than to persuade a Californian court of the truthfulness of their assertions. And since the only relevant US authorities in this matter are representatives for the state of California, and California requrements are so and so, that is the only thing that is relevant – regardless if my country says I can file a company stamped napkin or whatnot?

Perrie Juran wrote: The requirements for an affidavit will vary by State in the U.S. and I'd have no idea what it is for other Countries. That is a question that needs answered by LL. Wouldn't it have to fulfill the requirements of California law for it to be recognized in a Californian court. California law is the governing law of the general TOS, so I suppose that applies to these filings as well. – Just my L$1, but yeah, LL must clarify.

Hippasus Alter wrote: Linden Lab wrote: Hi Yingzi, Skill gaming is defined as "a game, implemented through an Inworld object: 1) whose outcome is determined by skill and is not contingent, in whole or in material part, upon chance; 2) requires or permits the payment of Linden Dollars to play; 3) provides a payout in Linden Dollars; and 4) is legally authorized by applicable United States and international law. " Thank you, Hi The mentioning of International law makes things complicated to the point of "legal impossibilities". I am specially talking about your (LL) legal demands for the Operators ( 4.a.(iii) in the application form) "(iii) A Reasoned Legal Opinion that describes each Skill Game (including detailed operational descriptions) and provides a detailed analysis of its compliance with applicable United States and international law; " This is a request for "Reasoned Legal Opinion" by attorneys specialized in international litigation. These are highly specialized and costly demands. Please have your legal adviser provide us with details on what will be needed in terms of international law. Greetings from Greece Most likely the Greek legislation in addition to the US legilsation is applicable to you. There might be some borderline cases where EU legislation also may come into play if there are directives that are yet to be worked into the Greek legislation.

Wow - thanks for the tip! I had some pine trees and industrial stairs gone adult. Go figure!

You can file provided you find the legal support to prepare all the documentation required.

Lacy Wilder wrote: So, bottom line. This means that on August 1st, all gaming locations will need to shut down and wait for games to be approved. Does that sound about right? Pretty much the situation unless someone's got a fastlane.

Zak Kozlov wrote: Hey, everything have a good side! ... this whole policy is so crazy that it motivates me to be productive again and find a workaround! :-) Unfortunately it might be like pissing in the pants to keep warm since whatever creativity people come up with will most likely not transfer to SLv2. But it saves your day in the short term.

Phil Deakins wrote: Gavin Hird wrote: Most people I have spoken with on the subject of child avatars (and I spoken with a LOT) find them creepy pushing their agenda and roleplay in ways people are very uncomfortable with. I hope they get banned from these sims (and from the rest of SL for that sake.) That post doesn't belong in this thread. You need to start a new thread if you want to discuss it. Agreed, and i don't want to discuss it here. It was simply a statement to what should be allowed in these sims or not. My position on child avatars are well known and has been the same since we discovered the creepyness of what went on in the Bay City infohubs. Say no more.

Most people I have spoken with on the subject of child avatars (and I spoken with a LOT) find them creepy pushing their agenda and roleplay in ways people are very uncomfortable with. I hope they get banned from these sims (and from the rest of SL for that sake.)

Since most child avatars claim they are enacting their lost childhood or the worry free feeling of being a child, I take it that participating in gambling is not part of such an experience (a RL child would normally not have entry to venues of such activity) Therefore I don't see child avatars not having access should be any problem. If they want to participate the can "grow up" quickly via My Outfits.

Innula Zenovka wrote: Gavin Hird wrote: daisybloomer wrote: should you be faced with a legal challenge and/or end up in court. In my neck of the woods there is no way that could ever happen as there is no mechanism to force anyone into legal proceedings in the US (which is due to the US having the death penalty in it's legislation.) Are you sure about that, Gavin? In general, the ECHR (and the EU/EEA extradtion treaty with the USA) certainly bars extradition to the USA on capital charges UNLESS the USA promises, in advance, not to seek the death penalty in case of extradition or, if it's imposed, to commute it. Since I doubt the death penalty is going to be an issue here, no matter how badly any of us Europeans upset the Americans, I really don't think it's going to matter one way or the other in legal proceedings relating to this matter. Yes, there is no extradition treaty at all in place between my country and the US and the reason why is that we do not ever extradite - regardless of reason - to countries with a death penalty in the legislation. For wartime the rules are slightly different. Other countries in Europe have the same, as this is not subject to any EU directive, but regarded a national affair. I think the rules are different for the UK for instance (as seen in the wikileaks case, but then it can be appealed into oblivion...). If I, however, were to travel to the US, then the story is different.

daisybloomer wrote: should you be faced with a legal challenge and/or end up in court. In my neck of the woods there is no way that could ever happen as there is no mechanism to force anyone into legal proceedings in the US (which is due to the US having the death penalty in it's legislation.)

Oh, and add to that, why the quarterly fee if it basically is an internal LL registry?

Innula Zenovka wrote: Gavin Hird wrote: Question to Linden Lab: The impression I get from reading the updated FAQ is that creators and operators will be registered in some public register, and that there is a quarterly fee associated with being listed there in addition to the original listing process. If this impression correct, and if yes, exactly what is the registry (name, url...)? Maybe they mean Linden Lab Official Second Life Skill Gaming Approved Participants. Maybe, but then I don't quite get the need for legal affidavits unless there is a very strong need for some cover my ass documentation that will keep LL in the clear if a violation of law is found. Particularly to the FAQ requirements of: A reasoned legal opinion from a credible attorney in good standing, which describes in detail the operation and legality of the games of skill you are submitting for approval; A sworn affidavit or declaration that 1) certifies the facts set forth in the application and legal opinion; and 2) attests compliance with Linden Lab’s requirements.

Question to Linden Lab: The impression I get from reading the updated FAQ is that creators and operators will be registered in some public register, and that there is a quarterly fee associated with being listed there in addition to the original listing process. If this impression correct, and if yes, exactly what is the registry (name, url...)?

Innula Zenovka wrote: By US law, do you mean US Federal law or California state law or what? And what does "International Law" mean in this context? Normally it refers to international treaties, but I'm not sure if that's what it's supposed to mean here. I also wondered about that. The current TOS refers to California law ( believe), but since you have listed some US states in the Prohibited States and Countries list, do we have to take different state legislation into account too, or is that something Linden Lab does, and therefore wholesale prohibits certain states. When it comes to International law - exactly what do you mean here? I suppose you could consider EU legislation international law as applicable to the US, but it certainly would not cover the rest of the globe.

The problem is simply they muddle the message. A casual reader or someone who does not have the energy to read the entire thread and see the full context may get the wrong message or idea because it is stated with "such authority" that people may walk away with the impression this is how it is. We saw this repeatedly in the age verification discussion where confusion prevaled. It is therefore much better for everyone to await clear, consise statements from the policy maker on direct question for them. ... and it is not personal ;-)