Should Second Life reflect real life?

Ford Prefect · Post by **Ford Prefect** » Fri Jun 29, 2007 8:20 pm

Second Life for those who don't know is a virtual world similar to a multi-player web game. There is no game though, what you do is create a character and interact with the other characters. Your character can buy clothes and other modifications and you can buy virtual property such as an island and buy a virtual house and virtual furnishings.
Sounds trivial but when I posted the I checked the web site. There are currently 7.8 Million members, 34,000 were on line and $1,699.000 US dollars had changed hands in the last 24 hrs.
http://secondlife.com/
A large, but not openly discussed aspect of Second Life is sex. There are \"Mature\" areas where people's characters interact sexually. Of course you can buy or build modifications to your character's look and actions that enhance this sexual interaction. It seems that the \"mature\" areas might be the majority of the appeal of Second Life but no one knows for sure and Linden Labs is not offering any information.
One of the lesser aspects of this area is called \"Age Play\" One or more of the characters interacting will have the appearance of a child.
This is illegal in many countries such as Germany, France and Canada but legal in the U.S. However only 20% of the users of Second Life originate in the U.S.
There is some information and an opinion piece on the legalities here:
http://virtuallyblind.com/2007/05/09/ag ... worldwide/

So this is just a simple question to those who post here.
Should a virtual world such as Second Life be constrained by the same legal rules as real life?

I don't think we will find anyone here that finds paedophilia acceptable in real life but in Second Life there are supposedly safeguards in place that ensure both participants in virtual paedophilia are adults. Is that good enough to call this sexual activity between two consenting adults? Or should Linden Labs be forced to police their world and eject members acting outside acceptable real world morality?

I'm kind of split on this as it is quite the slippery slope when you stop people from pretending to do things. On the other hand if someone is pretending to shoot up and bomb their workplace or school someone should probably act.

Bet51987 · Post by **Bet51987** » Fri Jun 29, 2007 8:42 pm

Your last paragraph pretty much explains it all and IMO its Kool to enter the virtual world dressed as a cowgirl, cowboy, space invader, alien, avenger, even a young girl or boy.... but pretending to be a pedophile in the virtual world means you are a pedophile in the real world... whether you practice it or not.

All the virtual world does, is let you play out your hidden fantasies....

I think you have opened up an interesting thread and it will be interesting to see the \"freedom of expression\" advocates choke on this....

Why don't we all join. I am.

Bettina

roid · Post by **roid** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 12:38 am

Bett, you may be shocked to know that Paedophilia is legal everywhere. It's committing sex offences that is illegal.

Paedophilia is sexual attraction to kids yeah? You can make the sexual ACT illegal, but sexual attraction is an internal process, undetectable - that's "thought police" stuff.

maybe i'm being pedantic.

Ford Prefect wrote:On the other hand if someone is pretending to shoot up and bomb their workplace or school someone should probably act.

why?

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 1:01 am

I think some of that stuff is creepy and immoral, but shouldn't be criminal.

The government shouldn't get involved in what consenting adults do with each other, so long as it's not endangering anyone. If consenting adults want to pretend to be kids while they have sex in person or online, that's none of the government's business. If people (adults or kids) want to play Counterstrike in a level that resembles someone's school or business, that's none of the government's business. If they want to talk about how much they hate Jews, Christians, Muslims, Republicans, Democrats, Blacks, Gays, or Mathematicians, that's not the government's business. We don't need thought police, and we don't need fantasy police.

The only reason the government should get involved is if there's a legitimate threat of harm, or if there's harassment going on. If you're on some online game and somebody keeps trying to cyber with you even though you keep blocking them or rejecting them, you should be able to send the police after them for cyberstalking. If someone in an online game makes it clear that they're planning on abusing some kid or shooting up their school, the police should get involved. But if there's no clear threat of actual crimes being committed, the government should step off.

Just say NO to thought police. Just say NO to fantasy police.

Ford Prefect · Post by **Ford Prefect** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 10:41 am

Lothar: Did you note in the article that in the areas where virtual child/adult sex takes place there is photographic material available of actual child/sex acts.
Should we ignore that too?

Gekko71 · Post by **Gekko71** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 10:52 am

I'm all for denying the thought-police a toe-hold in virtual reality, but I think that this is one thing that *should* be policed. If these displays of a child-like avatar engaged in sex are able to be viewed by other memebers of Second Life, the realy what you're looking at is Kiddie Porn.

The fact that it's a *simulation* of someone having sex with a minor is irrelevant - you could argue that sex scenes in movies (and certain soft-core porno) is much the same... but these images are still policed. I also note that this is a subject where *all possible illustrations of the concept* are banned. You can't get away with a kiddie-porn cartoon or animation in the public domain without breaching public decency laws, so an animated adult avatar having sex with a child-like avatar would definitely qualify. Especially since ... (post continued below)

Gekko71 · Post by **Gekko71** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 10:53 am

...the only possible reason to create such an image would be to titify and sexually arouse either the participants, the viewers or all of the above. And if those fantasys also involved a bondage element, the you are definitely looking at something that crosses societies current moral boundaries.

If the image displays an adult in *any* form, having sexual relations (or sexually penetrating) a child, then that probably satisfies the current legal definition of child pornography.

But the whole cyber virtual-sex problems don't stop there. In a recent documentary I saw on Australian TV, there mentioned an incident where an Avatar in Second life was \"virtually\" raped.

How this happened I have no idea - the program didn't elaborate enormously, and Linden Labs didn't comment in any meaningful way. But the show's producers did manage to track down a comment from the lady who made the complaint, and to quote her letter, in her eyes: \"it looked and felt like a violation\". Like many people who spend time on Second Life, there was a clear link for her between her real emotions and the virtual events that take place within.

And finally - there's the whole \"escallation\" can of worms to consider. Kids have gone on highly deadly shooting sprees, ganering their killing skill almost entirely form FPS format games (like \"Postal\" for example - which is illegal to OWN here in Australia, let alone play.)

Spousal abusers and serial killers typically practice their brutality on animals before turning their attention to humans (the FBI apparently keep a very close eye on any ongoing reports of animal cruelty.)

(Keep in mind, all I'm trying to say here is that escallation in behaviour does take place in both the virtual world an the real world - usually by people whom for whatever reason have trouble separating fantasy from reality. There are many mental health conditions that help create this particular problem.)

We already have sexual predators going online to recruit and groom younger children for sexual activities. In this kind of second-life scenario, we really have the ideal forum for this kind of behaviour to take place (I am aware that there are proof of age requirements in order to access these areas ...but in an age where credit card companies send viable credit cards to dogs and goldfish because their owners filled out an application as a gag ...how comprehensive are those age controls really?)

Frankly the whole idea of my kids being exposed to any of the above turns my stomach and makes me want to isolate my kids from the web altogether. Yes that's an over-reaction, but by God this is one subject I'm not willing to ever take any chances on. (That's why I always supervise my child's net time at home - but so many other people don't.)

If we let it happen in virtual reality, then IMO we are really saying that in some circumstances and in certain places this kind of behaviour is acceptable - that's a precedent I really don't want to have set on *any* grounds.

Gekko71 · Post by **Gekko71** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 11:03 am

...and please keep in mind: it is a behaviour we're talking about. In order to creat these images, you msut open an account, part with money, alter your avatar and instruct it to perform a lewd act. These are all physical behaviours, not jsut teh imaginings of one individuals mind with no outward manifestation whatsoever (and what goes on in someone's mind is definitely somethign we shouldn't police. But as soon as they turn those thoughts into any sort of enabling behaviour...that's where IMO we have to draw the line.

Dakatsu · Post by **Dakatsu** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 1:41 pm

I honestly don't see the big deal. Some people will react saying: But they are practicing paedophilia!

Heres a thought: I play violent videogames. My favorite is a mod called ballistic weapons. In this, people explode with severed limbs, bloody stumps, just pure gore. This means I love to kill and I am going to grow up being a serial killer, right? Actually, I am a masochist who loves bondage and to be beaten by my girlfriend. I am very nice to anyone, and I haven't even knowlingly hurt an insect. Kind of a contradiction, isn't it?

Basically what you do in a virtual reality thing is most likely very different from what they do in real life. Obviously if they are discussing about raping a real child, then they should bust them. But what people do in games like that in most cases shouldn't matter.

roid · Post by **roid** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 7:10 pm

i am aware of this meme:

\"ILLEGAL IN CANADA\"
Originated October 2005, when a Canadian sex-offender was convicted of owning Lolikon hentai, charged with Child Pornography. Traditionally, there had been a barrier between drawn media depicting children and real photographic or video child pornography. Virtual images were considered to not be child pornography and thus not illegal material. ILLEGAL IN CANADA became a catch-phrase to describe loli art, poking fun at the Canadian ruling, which many legal experts described as an extreme case with extenuating circumstances. This may be true, especially since the man convicted had been charged multiple times with various forms of sexual misconduct with minors. Also seen as \"BANNED/B& IN CANADA\" early in its life, especially if someone posted real CP or a lolikon pic graphic enough to look traced.

roid · Post by **roid** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 7:17 pm

Gekko71 wrote:But the whole cyber virtual-sex problems don't stop there. In a recent documentary I saw on Australian TV, there mentioned an incident where an Avatar in Second life was "virtually" raped.

haha, yeah i saw that show too (fellow aussie).
it was the source of many lulz

.

the internet is rape central, yeah you should probably not let your kids on here if this bothers you.

I saw that woman complaining about 2nd life rape and i thought "welcome to the internet retard".

Bet51987 · Post by **Bet51987** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 8:24 pm

roid wrote:Bett, you may be shocked to know that Paedophilia is legal everywhere. It's committing sex offences that is illegal.

Paedophilia is sexual attraction to kids yeah? You can make the sexual ACT illegal, but sexual attraction is an internal process, undetectable - that's "thought police" stuff.

maybe i'm being pedantic.

Ford Prefect wrote:On the other hand if someone is pretending to shoot up and bomb their workplace or school someone should probably act.
why?

I understand that but it doesn't mean that the pedophile will always remain harmless. In the real world its a very short step for him to take from the attraction side of the line to the assault side so I fear the virtual world could push some to take that step.

I wonder how many people here would allow their kids to play Descent with an admitted pedo....

Bee

Grendel · Post by **Grendel** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 10:05 pm

Guilty until proven innocent..

Ford Prefect · Post by **Ford Prefect** » Sun Jul 01, 2007 9:09 am

As I said I have mixed feelings on this. Two consenting adults engaging in sex play where one pretends to be a child is legal pretty much everywhere and should be. In a virtual world where the action is just a graphical representation it is not really sex so there are two strikes against censorship.
On the other hand a place where paedophiles congregate have pretend child/adult sex, discuss c/a sex and trade information on where to get real c/a sex is not the kind of place that should be easily tolerated. Various police and private investigation networks scan the internet regularly looking for these kind of places to try to track and suppress child abusers. There have been a number of high profile cases where practising paedophiles have been caught through their internet activity.
It takes very little imagination to figure out how a paedophile could open an adult Second Life account for a child they are trying to \"groom\" for sex and through exposing them to a virtual where c/a is \"normal\" sway them toward real c/a sex.
Yes of course the child would have to be a willing participant. As long and there is an Esc key and you can close your eyes there is no rape on the internet. But child sex laws are fashioned on the basis that below a certain arbitrary age a child cannot make a true decision.
Maybe this is not an area for international law enforcement. Maybe Linden Labs should make an effort to close these areas down. But then that would be an attack on that most holy principle. The right to make money without restraint. I think Linden Labs is the real culprit here.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Sun Jul 01, 2007 3:47 pm

Ford Prefect wrote:Lothar: Did you note in the article that in the areas where virtual child/adult sex takes place there is photographic material available of actual child/sex acts.

I did notice that. Didn't think it was worth talking about. Actual child-sex is illegal, as is putting pictures of it online, so there's no real discussion to have on that point. I think we can all agree, that's an actual crime and it should be prosecuted.

The thing that interested me was your comment about the company "polic[ing] their world" and exiling people who role-play outside acceptable real-world morality, and your later comment about stopping people from pretending to do things -- stopping "pretend crimes".

By all means, the police should stay on top of REAL crimes, and if that means infiltrating child-porn rings that operate under the radar in "Second Life", go for it. But they have no reason to get involved with PRETEND crimes. (Note that a virtual rape is usually a REAL crime -- sexual harassment.)

Maybe Linden Labs should make an effort to close these areas down. But then that would be an attack on that most holy principle. The right to make money without restraint.

Remember that principle comes with another: the right not to buy from companies you find objectionable. If consumers have a big enough problem with this particular company, they'll spend their money on competing products. If a company is doing something slimy and underhanded, don't give them your money. I won't.

One thing they could possibly do is set it up so that underage avatars are completely blocked from sexual activity. It's always a trade-off -- on the one hand, they cut off the pedophiles from a source of entertainment, but on the other hand, they cut off consenting adults from their make-believe fantasies. That's the decision they have to make -- do they want to cater to those fantasies at the expense of also being (at least partially) a haven for pedophiles? How many safeguards are appropriate for them to put in place?

roid · Post by **roid** » Sun Jul 01, 2007 6:13 pm

Lothar wrote:(Note that a virtual rape is usually a REAL crime -- sexual harassment.)

**I put on my Wizard hat and cape**

virtual teabagging

if ppl can't handle this they don't belong on the interblag.

"wah wah my online avatar is being raped, it feels real to meeeeeeeeeee". The internet is serious business

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 11:33 pm

roid wrote:
Lothar wrote:(Note that a virtual rape is usually a REAL crime -- sexual harassment.)
**I put on my Wizard hat and cape**

if ppl can't handle this they don't belong on the interblag.

True... you should expect people to start crap with you online, and know where your "quit" button is if you can't handle them starting it.

Doesn't change my point, though. If people can't handle somebody saying "you suck" in person, they've got issues. But it's still a crime to verbally harass someone. And it remains a crime if you use teh intraweb to do it.

Blue · Post by **Blue** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 12:00 am

The psychological problems which result from mass isolation are... unimaginable. Infants who grow without human contact have underdeveloped brains...this kind of thing needs to be looked at with a critical eye for that fact alone.

I think multiplayer games like D3 are already pushing a border, but we don't need to spend time to progess in our game. We can take a day, a week, a month, or a year off, hop back and and only be left behind as far as how \"rusty\" we are. MMORPG's force you to WORK in them to develop your character to better your gameplay. Effectively, the longer you play, the more work is required and the smaller the rewards become.

So i don't know...as far as i'm conserned these things are NOT good for us as a species.

Ford Prefect · Post by **Ford Prefect** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 7:13 pm

Goodness what is with this forum? It can take forever for a post to be entered and if I don't wait long enough my post is not entered.

Whine, snivel, wahh all my hard work wasted.

Well enough of complaining of abuse by this forum.

Lothar: We don't allow unfettered capitalism in things like drugs in foods or allow companies that we know use slave labour to export goods to our countries so I wonder if we should not expect more of Linden Labs to allow them to conduct business in our countries. Yes I know the internet is not easily policed but Linden trades in U.S. dollars and some pressure could be brought to bear on them.
I couldn't spend money with Linden if I wanted too as this old 'puter runs at <30 fps on D3. I don't imagine it would take well to a graphics rich environment like Second Life. The concept intrigues me though as it is baby steps on the way to the virtual worlds of authors like William Gibson.
I see where it is now possible to induce the feeling of side to side motion by passing a low current through pads behind the ears. Coming soon to a video game near you. Within a few decades we will have the full immersion suit. Get ready to be an old fart complaining about what your grandkids do for entertainment.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Wed Jul 04, 2007 12:05 am

I'm not certain what sort of wrongdoing you see on their part that warrants government intervention.

As far as I can tell, they're cooperating with law enforcement efforts to go after actual pedos when there's evidence of actual crimes. They've put some safeguards -- perhaps not enough, but some -- in place to keep kids out of \"adult\" areas of the game.

If they were engaging in mass child porn or whatever, I'd expect our government to just block teh packets at our borders or something along those lines. If they're just allowing simulated sex acts between adults which sometimes involve \"child\" avatars, that's creepy, but not really the territory in which the government needs to get involved. It's more like \"don't send them your money\" territory.

Kilarin · Post by **Kilarin** » Wed Jul 04, 2007 7:03 am

Lothar wrote:If they're just allowing simulated sex acts between adults which sometimes involve "child" avatars, that's creepy, but not really the territory in which the government needs to get involved. It's more like "don't send them your money" territory.

My heart is with Bettina and the others on this. I wanna see those pedo's locked up!

BUT, my brain says that Lothar is absolutely right.

When the government starts prosecuting "thought crime", we are in big trouble. And that's what this would be.

Ford Prefect · Post by **Ford Prefect** » Wed Jul 04, 2007 9:47 am

I probably agree that this is not the case where the jackbooted storm troopers need to seize Linden's offices and purify their web site. But that carries the caveat that I haven't seen what is going on.
The basis of the illegality ruling in Germany, Canada and other countries is that this is a graphic (by that I mean drawn) representation of an act that is considered pornographic. In these countries it is illegal to make or posses art work that portrays pornographic acts such as bestiality, rape, child sex etc. As I understand it such works are allowed in the U.S. as part of \"free speech\". Obviously no one checks what a person may doodle on their sketch pad and the law is intended to prevent displays or sale of such works.
Does that go too far for most of you?

Canuck · Post by **Canuck** » Wed Jul 04, 2007 12:21 pm

I did a little poking at Linden Labs and started thinking what a wonderful place to launder money for criminals. Also are these guys FDIC insured? I haven't checked but I think not. Think of the concept of being able to manipulate your own stock market and knowing in advance (insider trading) when to buy and sell shares... without having the credentials or regulatory agencies required. Worse than the Canadian Stock Market. EDIT: Seems like Linden Labs is not FDIC insured and someone figured out the scam...Pyramid Scheme

You'd make money hand over fist. Already thousands of people are complaining about accounts and \"goods\" being lost... oh well too bad for them and good for Linden Labs.

I think Second Life is creepy, my roommate spends all his extra time in it. He eats his meals in his room and rarely interacts with the rest of the household.
Very isolating in the real world. I dunno what the attraction is, but millions are hooked.

I think that adults wanting sex with children and pets need a schwack in the head and the Nether Regions and Linden Labs needs to have someone watching it.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Wed Jul 04, 2007 4:18 pm

Here's the problem with the pedo/avatar issue. In R/L a adult interacting with a child in a sexual manner is illegal and rightly so. However what we have on line is a murky playground. Even tho a avatar may look like a child, if it is a adult who owns it then in fact it is a adult one is interacting with. Who would you charge with a crime? The adult who is portraying himself as a child or the adult partner who is being sexually interactive with the adult/child avatar?
A second issue would be age determination to prove a crime was committed. We all now there are children who look older than they are and there are adult who look childlike. Since there are no birth certificates involved how do you know the age of the supposed child looking avatar?
Cops can go into chat rooms pretending to be kids, but the only way (correct me if I'm in error) the target adult can be caught is if a face to face meeting is set up where the adult thinks he is meeting a child. With the MMORPH in question, no R/L meetings are set up.
That is not to say the cops can't set up a child avatar and play the game in hopes of snaring some adult, but then the cops are being part of what the activity in question is being discussed.

Canuck · Post by **Canuck** » Thu Jul 05, 2007 12:35 am

Seems the login verification is pretty weak so technically any kid with online access could be exposed to, \"consenting adult themes\" and more neurons, calcium and vitamin D sucked out of their systems due to lack of sunlight.

I don't think children should be exposed to this IMHO, but we are dealing with Investment Bankers here, they have no souls.

Haha seems Judges hate em too!
http://pblog.bna.com/techlaw/virtual_games/index.html

Ford Prefect · Post by **Ford Prefect** » Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:56 pm

From the report:

Essentially, Judge Eduardo C. Robreno rolled up the court's opinion in Comb v. Paypal Inc., 218 F. Supp.2d (N.D. Cal. 2002), and proceeded to beat Linden Research over the head with it for about a dozen pages.

Sedwick · Post by **Sedwick** » Thu Jul 05, 2007 9:35 pm

I'm sure the people at LL didn't have this potential exploitation in mind when they were designing sex acts and changing of avatars' ages. I believe one should be allowed to satisfy their fantasies virtually (so long as it leads to no harm in the real world), but I truly hope these \"mature areas\" are strictly enforced. As Canuck touched on, children should not be able to come across something like this and be exposed to it and be led to think it's OK.

fliptw · Post by **fliptw** » Thu Jul 05, 2007 11:55 pm

The people at LL didn't design the sex acts stuff, that was all done by SL users.

Canuck · Post by **Canuck** » Thu Aug 02, 2007 11:52 pm

Lol saw this and had to post it in this thread;
http://www.getafirstlife.com/

And my roommate has totally used up my bandwidth for the month in about two weeks of hanging around in Second Life. This bandwidth is to be shared with three people. I told him to knock it off but he doesn't seem to be able to. Perhaps its easier for him to interact online than in real life.

fliptw · Post by **fliptw** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 5:31 pm

restrict his bandwidth at the router

Ford Prefect · Post by **Ford Prefect** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 6:27 pm

Too funny.

And the guy that set it up is from Vancouver which is next door to my home town. Good Canadian humour.

Palzon · Post by **Palzon** » Sat Aug 04, 2007 1:00 pm

Canuck wrote:Lol saw this and had to post it in this thread;
http://www.getafirstlife.com/

Get a First Life wrote:"fornicate using your actual genitals"

Canuck · Post by **Canuck** » Mon Aug 06, 2007 12:53 pm

Well just had an episode with my roommate. I asked him to cut down on his bandwidth usage and he snapped back, \"until you get a bill for overages don't talk to me about it\" and walked away. Today I wanted to talk things out and maybe work out a compromise. He chose to grab some food and run upstairs to the computer... mumbling a grudging good morning when I greeted him.

He's decided to give me the cold shoulder attitude today so I decided to tune him in. Theres an open Network he has setup to leech from as well as mine so that goes to show you his usage habits and he had set it up with IP's for 3 nics and a router, they are all blocked now, password is changed and my Network keys are all changed. When he goes to log in to the system he is in for a surprise.

I wrote him a letter explaining my position on his bandwidth usage and told him I wasn't pleased at his attitude and how he talked to me. I wrote that I won't put up with his continued bandwidth usage or mouth and if he needs to be mainlined to the Internet that bad to get his own account.

Ford Prefect · Post by **Ford Prefect** » Tue Aug 07, 2007 7:57 pm

Tough love eh? Better that being co-dependant. Good luck.

fliptw · Post by **fliptw** » Tue Aug 07, 2007 8:18 pm

nice, before he gets there, you might want to ban his hostname and MAC addies rather than use IP's, or the ports he's plugged into.

just banning the IP's means he can just pick a new one.

regardless, look into Quality of Service if your router supports it, you can throttle him so he's not hogging everything.

Canuck · Post by **Canuck** » Tue Aug 07, 2007 10:29 pm

I filtered his 3 internal PCI card MACs and his router MAC. I've worked things out by upgrading to the enhanced high speed which will give us twice the speed and twice the dl limits. It works out to about $3.00 each more a month, otherwise at $2.00 a Gig overage charges he would be paying 10 times the cost of the upgrade. Also if I cut him off I will pay more anyway.
Still a bunch of crap to go through because someone can't peel themselves away from the net. Hopefully when Winter comes I wont have to do this again.
Come to think of it I will just yank his line from the router and tell him hes on his own.

Canuck · Post by **Canuck** » Tue Aug 07, 2007 11:08 pm

He just found out... he's po'd... but hey he learned something.

Should Second Life reflect real life?

Should Second Life reflect real life?

Re: Should Second Life reflect real life?

Re:

Re: Should Second Life reflect real life?

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re: