Difference between revisions of "Linden Lab Official talk:Adult Content FAQ"

From Second Life Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m
(Have the rules on "depictions of nudity" changed?)
Line 11: Line 11:
  
 
I'm not trying to argue the case one way or the other -- I just think it needs spelling out, because it's not obvious to me what the rules are, and I don't think "who is going to know what is happening in their own home?" is helpful.  As everyone knows, there's various activities that are completely banned in SL, and the fact people are not advertising them -- indeed, they may well be going to considerable pains to conceal them -- will be no protection if they get found out, after all. [[User:Innula Zenovka|Innula Zenovka]] 04:46, 26 July 2011 (PDT)
 
I'm not trying to argue the case one way or the other -- I just think it needs spelling out, because it's not obvious to me what the rules are, and I don't think "who is going to know what is happening in their own home?" is helpful.  As everyone knows, there's various activities that are completely banned in SL, and the fact people are not advertising them -- indeed, they may well be going to considerable pains to conceal them -- will be no protection if they get found out, after all. [[User:Innula Zenovka|Innula Zenovka]] 04:46, 26 July 2011 (PDT)
 +
 +
===Depictions of Nudity===
 +
"'''''Non-sexualized depictions of nudity (basically, the images most skin-makers tend to use) are Moderate NOT Adult'''''": I think this moves the goalposts a bit, and could have considerable implications for adult content manufacturers, or at least for our packaging and advertising.  In the past, the distinction was between photorealistic nudity (glossed on the [http://community.secondlife.com/t5/English-Knowledge-Base/Maturity-ratings/ta-p/700119 maturity ratings page] as "images either are or cannot be distinguished from a photograph") and other sorts of image.  That's given us rather more leeway about our packaging and vendor pictures than we have on the marketplace, and, while I'm pretty sure all the materials I use on my adverts and vendors would still be OK for M land, I really don't want to have to review everything and make sure there's no stray female nipples in view unless a change in the rules means I absolutely have to. 
 +
 +
For what it's worth, I far prefer the distinction between photorealistic vs non-photorealistic, because it's clear and obvious.  It protects skin-makers because, no matter how good and "photorealistic" the skin, it's never going to be mistaken for a photograph, and means they don't have to worry about the far more subjective test of whether their advert is "sexualized" or "non-sexualized".  [[User:Innula Zenovka|Innula Zenovka]] 07:44, 26 July 2011 (PDT)

Revision as of 07:44, 26 July 2011

Once this page is deemed reasonably complete and has been reviewed internally, then we will redirect History/Adult content to here, unless people may want to keep the old page around for posterity.

Please add questions and comments here. --Rand Linden 22:16, 25 July 2011 (PDT)

Public vs Private needs more clarification?

I'm very uncomfortable with the implications of "For example, if someone whats to have a swinger party and invite some friends, there is no problem with that. As long as they don't advertise it, who is going to know what is happening in their own home?" That says to me that it's in some way illicit, and only OK if you stay under the radar. Maybe that is the case, but, if it is, it should be spelt out in terms, to my mind.

It's particularly an issue, I think, since when Blondin was trying to answer people's questions a couple of years ago, he didn't have Hiding avatars and restricting avatar sounds to worry about. There we're warned that Adult activities are not allowed on parcels in General regions, regardless of whether the parcel has hidden avatars. On Moderate land, such activity is only permitted privately, behind closed doors, and it's always been my understanding that I'm OK to have a sex bed in my house on Moderate land, so long as it's kept private and it's just for me and my friends, but not a sex blanket in my garden -- if I want to do that, I have to be on Adult land.

But certainly you could now argue that the metaphorical doors are far more tightly shut if I put the blanket in my garden, hide avatars on the parcel and set access to group only, than are they if I have a sex bed in my house. In the former case, all anyone's ever going to see from the outside is an innocuous blanket; in the latter, anyone can cam in and, if I've not surrounded the plot with ban lines, come and join the fun. Is it really the case that the sex blanket in someone's garden, with avatars hidden, is against the rules on M land but it becomes OK if the garden is then enclosed within a large prim box with the walls and ceiling set to fully transparent on the inside and fully opaque on the outside?

I'm not trying to argue the case one way or the other -- I just think it needs spelling out, because it's not obvious to me what the rules are, and I don't think "who is going to know what is happening in their own home?" is helpful. As everyone knows, there's various activities that are completely banned in SL, and the fact people are not advertising them -- indeed, they may well be going to considerable pains to conceal them -- will be no protection if they get found out, after all. Innula Zenovka 04:46, 26 July 2011 (PDT)

Depictions of Nudity

"Non-sexualized depictions of nudity (basically, the images most skin-makers tend to use) are Moderate NOT Adult": I think this moves the goalposts a bit, and could have considerable implications for adult content manufacturers, or at least for our packaging and advertising. In the past, the distinction was between photorealistic nudity (glossed on the maturity ratings page as "images either are or cannot be distinguished from a photograph") and other sorts of image. That's given us rather more leeway about our packaging and vendor pictures than we have on the marketplace, and, while I'm pretty sure all the materials I use on my adverts and vendors would still be OK for M land, I really don't want to have to review everything and make sure there's no stray female nipples in view unless a change in the rules means I absolutely have to.

For what it's worth, I far prefer the distinction between photorealistic vs non-photorealistic, because it's clear and obvious. It protects skin-makers because, no matter how good and "photorealistic" the skin, it's never going to be mistaken for a photograph, and means they don't have to worry about the far more subjective test of whether their advert is "sexualized" or "non-sexualized". Innula Zenovka 07:44, 26 July 2011 (PDT)