2 Jun 2009

Posted by Xantarius Cain in Business, Events, Featured Articles, Metaverse Politics, Objections, Places & Events, Ramblings, Randomness | 5 Comments

Second Life’s Upcoming Adult Content Changes and Why I Oppose Them

Sometime near the end of June 2009, Linden Lab will implement new policies regarding “adult” content on the Second Life main grid. Along with these policy changes will come new server code. The changes are summarized as follows.

  1. The owners of all “adult” content on the mainland will be required to move their content to a new “adult” continent (called Ursula — Edited 3 Jun 2009: Ursula is now called “Zindra”). Those who will be asked to move will be eligible for a land swap.
  2. All Second Life residents on the main grid will be required to age-verify themselves with Linden Lab. This can be done either by placing a credit card on file with Linden Lab, or associating a verified PayPal account with the Second Life account in question. (For some outside of the United States, this may not be possible, and a third-party age-verification service is being contracted by Linden Lab. Depending on nation of origin, one or more forms of identification may be required in order to age-verify. This is murky right now.)
  3. All Second Life in-game search will be filtered for “adult” words. This list of words will be compiled by Linden Lab. It is unclear if this list of words will be published. Age-verified adults will be required to manually turn off the filtering of “adult” words. Those who are not age-verified will not be allowed to remove the filtering.
  4. Residents who do not, or cannot, age-verify will not have access to the new Ursula continent (Edited 3 Jun 2009: Ursula is now called “Zindra”). These residents will be restricted to the mainland and private regions.

Many Second Life residents oppose this new adult content policy (which I will refer to as “Adult Content Changes“) for a myriad of reasons. Some reasons include: the fear of a third-party having access to identifying information and/or the fear of Linden Lab having access to this information, the time and expense involved in moving a business from a mature-rated mainland region to a new “adult” region, concerns about freedom of expression, concerns about how this will change the way people behave in Second Life, concerns for the future prosperity of Second Life, etc.

For me, and for many others, this is not about sex or pornography. I am extremely concerned that Linden Lab has chosen to alter Second Life in such a profound way. When Second Life was created, it was hailed as a great libertarian experiment. The message from Linden Lab was simple: The residents of Second Life will be its creators. They will build and shape the world as they see fit within the minor constraints we have set.

Right now there are two zoning types for land in Second Life: PG and Mature. Mature land, at the present time, allows for just about anything. Those not wishing to view adult content can simply filter their search results by checking a box in the search window. After Linden Lab’s upcoming changes, adult material will no longer be allowed on mature land.

This changes everything.

Linden Lab, with one massive update to their client and server software, will do the following:

 

  1. Move all adult content to a new continent that is out of sight from the rest of the Grid.
  2. Cause the land values of mature-zoned mainland regions to plummet.
  3. Create a caste system for all Second Life residents: Those who are age-verified and can see adult content, and those who are not and cannot.
  4. Cause a potentially steep decline in business for those residents who run adult enterprises, despite the fact that many of these businesses are on private islands. (It has been argued that those who have paid the $1,000 — or more, depending on when they signed their agreement — setup fee for their private islands are entitled to a refund if Linden Lab is going to change the rules that were in place when they created their adult businesses. Since search is being filtered, and the potential client base is being decreased in number, these businesses may suffer and are not getting what they paid for.)
  5. Fundamentally change the way that Second Life looks, feels and works for all residents, age-verified or not. This is censorship for profit, plain and simple.

Since the beginning, Second Life was about freedom of expression. Linden Lab was happy to stay afloat, even become profitable, as a result of the sale of adult products and services on their Grid. It seems now that Linden Lab is willing to change the game, and back out of promises (whether implied or not) made along the way, in order to court real-world businesses, schools, and governments.

Yes, you heard it correctly. Linden Lab expects to be rolling in cash if it can attract those organizations that feel Second Life has a bad reputation as a sex-ridden pornucopia. Forget that they tried this before when Second Life was launched. Businesses came and expected to have their shiny, corporate regions crawling with Second Life residents. No one came. Why? Because being marketed to is not why people come to Second Life. The in-world content creators — real residents — were satisfying the needs of the population, and the population liked that they were buying products from people just like them. We did not need Pepsi, Dell or Nike. Now, Linden Lab is trying again, hoping it will work this time, residents be damned. The residents created the world, and the businesses, schools and governments will dictate to Linden Lab how the world shall be organized.

The residents of Second Life have done several things to voice their opposition to these changes. A JIRA ticket was opened by RichD Tomsen (Terminate All Installation of any “Adult Content” filtering, Relocation, Banning, Viewer Modifications, Server Modifications) and we all spread the word, asking residents to log in and vote on the ticket. A total of 4,418 people voted against these changes, but this ticket was closed late last night by Linden Lab as “Resolved” with the phrase “under advisement” used in the reasoning. This ticket reached the number one spot, in votes, in less than one month.

I, along with Firehorse Rearwin, founded the “Revoting Adults” protest group in Second Life and we began protesting at the Office Hour meetings of various Linden Lab employees. These Office Hours are held in order to give residents a chance to meet with the Lindens and ask questions, express concerns, or just chat about upcoming changes and events.

Signs in-hand, we began attending these Office Hours. We had about 15 people from Revolting Adults attend the first protest. Not bad, given that we were just starting. The second, third, and fourth protests were large enough to fill the Linden’s sims to capacity (we teamed up with another larger group that also opposes these changes). Each Office Hour we have attended has been dedicated to one thing: Adult Content Changes. Linden Lab ultimately refused to change their plans, or even slow them down a little, so we monopolized the Office Hour meetings and made them about the topic we wanted to discuss. This will continue, at least, until the changes are in place.

At each Office Hour we attended, we were met by a Linden who did not have all the answers. In their defense, I do not believe that they are given all the information. We repeatedly asked for numbers, specifically requesting the number of users, either as a whole number or a percentage of residents, who had requested these changes (the Lindens told us that a minority of residents did not want to see “adult” content as they moved around the world). No numbers were given. In fact, we were lead to believe that the people complaining about adult content were residents like us. Naturally, we wondered why the Lindens would turn Second Life upside down for a “minority” (their word) of users who were complaining about adult material in an adult game.  And then…

This past Sunday night at 6:00 PM SLT many of us attended a recording of the Copper Robot podcast. This event  was also attended by two Linden Lab employees (we were told that they were lawyers for the company). The Copper Robot (aka Mitch Wagner) asked many good questions, and received several answers, but this was the first time we heard a Linden employee state that their business and educational customers had requested these changes. Again, censorship for profit.

The Future of Second Life

In previous interviews, Second Life employees have stated that they view virtual worlds as the future of the Web. I tend to agree, but I think Linden Lab wants to have its cake and eat it, too. If the Lindens wish Second Life to be the standard for virtual worlds, as they claim, they must not forget the history of the Web. It did not succeed because it was censored, filtered or regulated. It was a success, and survived past the late-1990s because it was allowed to grow and mature, shaped by the people of the world. There were attempts to censor the Web, and thankfully, all were failures.

Linden Lab promised, in the beginning, that they would not behave as gods, handing down orders from high atop a mountain. This has changed. Linden Lab, by never assigning an employee to the JIRA ticket, and then closing the ticket after residents gathered 4,418 votes, has essentially told every resident who voted that they are not interested in hearing their complaints. These changes will be implemented at all costs to customer happiness. Censorship for profit.

With the emergence of additional virtual worlds (many of which are using Linden Lab’s own OpenSim standard — ironic?), Linden Lab has competition. I love Second Life and what it stood for, but I fear that it cannot be the standard if the Lindens act as our overlords.

Share with others:
  • email
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Blogplay
  • Add to favorites
  • Current
  • FriendFeed
  • HackerNews
  • Identi.ca
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • MySpace
  • NewsVine
  • Ping.fm
  • Posterous
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • RSS
  • Print
  • PDF
468 ad
  1. I have had a chat with Joppa Linden that is being denied from publishing by Linden Labs! http://bit.ly/1S71Bm

    • @Airethilien
      Three things…

      1.) I would love to see where you have agreed, in the SL Terms of Service, to not post IM conversations that you’ve had with Linden Lab employees. If we are not required, in the TOS, to get their permission then there is nothing that they can do if you post a conversation with them on the Web. In fact, I don’t think that an IM conversation meets the typical “reasonable expectation” of privacy. And chat on the public chat channel certainly does not meet any reasonable assumption of privacy.

      2.) I looked in the TOS (scanned it briefly) and did not find anything that says you cannot post chat conversations to the Web. If this is true, the most they can do is kindly ask that you refrain from posting the conversation and hope that you respect their wishes. Frankly, I believe that you can do as you wish and that you do not need their permission. If you haven’t signed an NDA (which they could include in the TOS if they wish), you are not breaking any laws or SL rules.

      3.) What does Linden Lab have to hide? If an employee had a conversation with you, did not ask that you sign an NDA first, but wishes to keep the conversation confidential, (a) why did they have the conversation in the first place and (b) what are they hiding from the rest of us that they are willing to share with you? It sounds like this employee told you something that he/she was not supposed to reveal to the public.

  2. In the TOS its stated residents need to abide by the Community Standards, and point 4 of those states:

    \Sharing personal information about a fellow Resident –including gender, religion, age, marital status, race, sexual preference, and real-world location beyond what is provided by the Resident in the First Life page of their Resident profile is a violation of that Resident’s privacy. Remotely monitoring conversations, posting conversation logs, or sharing conversation logs without consent are all prohibited in Second Life and on the Second Life Forums.\

    Now I conclude the following here:
    - This regulation concerns with Residents vs. eachother, not LL employees
    - Live Support is not mentioned here – am I allowed to post that log?

    • @Airethilien

      Thanks for digging up the info.

      …posting conversation logs, or sharing conversation logs without consent are all prohibited in Second Life and on the Second Life Forums.

      That’s a bit vague, isn’t it? I may interpret that as not being able to share conversation logs within the Second Life game or on their own forums, but since it doesn’t say that I cannot share the logs outside of Second Life (by posting them somewhere on the Web, for example), I can do whatever I want so long as I’m not doing it inside the game or on their forums. Confused? Me, too. That’s what happens when corporations write vague terms. I also disagree that a conversation with a Linden Lab employee is protected information, especially when you are asking them about a support issue, which is what this is.

      Bottom Line: Linden Lab claims far too much power over its customers. I’d like to see some of their terms challenged in a court room. There’s a difference between legal and wishful thinking. :)

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Second Life Terms of Service Claim Right to Access Your Computer- Xantarius Cain on Second Life - [...] a result of a comment on another article, I glanced through the Second Life Terms of Service (TOS) to ...

Leave a Reply