Virtual Child Porn in Second Life
by Alphaville Herald on 09/12/04 at 1:13 am
Everyone knows that Child Pornography is illegal and everyone *should* know that it is wrong. But what about virtual child porn? — cases in which no real child is victimized in the making of the porn, but in which a child is represented as having sex with an adult. Or imagine an avatar that was designed to look like an eight year old and offered itself as an escort and sex slave. Second Life must now confront this issue. Sasami Wishbringer is an avatar modelled after a Japanese anime character named Sasami, who has the body of an eight year old, but is in fact (according to the story) closer to 708 years old (see, an adult — or that is the copout). This avatar is currently an Escort for The Edge, and is also a slave at Fantasy Slave Market, and participates in the auctions there. Sasami Wishbringer also sells hentai (anime porn) featuring Sasami in game. Should this be allowed?
The user profile for Sasami Wishbringer
Some of the Sasami hentai being sold in Second Life (portions of screenshot censored)
For sale in second life. (portions of screenshot censored)
For sale in second life. (portions of screenshot censored)
The door to Sasami’s slave quarters at Fantasy Slave Market
Poster on the door to Sasami’s slave quarters.
The holding pen and auction block for the slaves at Fantasy Slave Market in Second Life
Sebine LifeWind
Feb 16th, 2007
For the love of all that is Unholy and Unlawful GET A LIFE… this is a GAME… If you fags want to go fuck someone over Child Porn GO FIND A REAL PERSON…
KMA from Cape Cod today
Feb 19th, 2007
I’m KMA. I own Cape Cod today. A very successfull online website about Cape Cod. I let people write about anything they want. I write about children sex. I love writing about children having sex. Come to Cape Cod today and read some of my stories. I like to write about the child sex of magician Tarquin Churchwell.
http://www.capecodtoday.com/
Upon further investigation into Tarquins early years it seems his mother was called to the principals office when Tar was a mere 10yo. Seems Tar had sex with his 4th grade teacher & was being sent home w/mom. Mom called Dad to come home and handle the uncomfortable challange of discussing what happened at school. Dad & Tar when for a ride to talk about what happened. Dad said it was normal to have fantisies about some of his teachers “but perhaps it was not such a good thing to act them out and maybe we should all just try & put this all ~behind~ us and go home and hopefully he best not do it again.” Tar said: “Gee thanks for understanding Dad.” And they went home. As they were pulling into the driveway Tar says “Hey Dad, do you think you can give me a ride over to my friend Billys house?” Whereupon his Dad said “Why son why not take your bike & ride it over there?” To which little Tarquin replies: “Yeah, well I would Dad… But my butt is really hurting.” And now Tarquin wants to ‘give it back’ – what he learned at school – To anyone who crosses him or Ha Ha – “Lies”. Where on to you fella -You are in need of serious help. You know: ‘Unresolvedchildhood’ “issues” still linger. The more you dish it out the more we gonna put it wherethe sun don’t shine!
nick m c
Mar 5th, 2007
go to bottom for main points
CHILD PORNOGRAPHY
Displaying child pornography or “kiddie porn” on the Internet is illegal in the United States. “Child pornography” is easier to define than more elusive concepts such as “obscenity,” but several categories of content exist that may or may not constitute child pornography, depending upon the circumstances. By using this webpage in any way you agree that you accept our Terms and Conditions. 1. Introduction:
Producing, possessing or distributing images of minors (anyone under the age of 18) engaged in sexual conduct is illegal. Some states in the United States and many countries allow sexual conduct and marriage between adults and minors, but visual depictions of that conduct are prohibited in the United States by federal law. Similarly, sexual conduct between minors or by a minor is often tolerated but visual depictions of that conduct are also prohibited. Child Pornography laws in the United States exist to protect children and are strictly enforced – websites that display any content that might be considered child pornography should expect to be prosecuted.
2. The First Amendment:
Unlike pornographic images of adults, the First Amendment does not protect the possession or distribution of child pornography. Content that depicts children engaged in sexual conduct is “a category of material outside the protection of the First Amendment.” New York v. Ferber, 458 U.S. 747 1982. The First Amendment does protect some material that could be considered child pornography, for example images in a medical textbook that show a child’s genitalia. Although the possession or distribution of such images might be protected by the First Amendment when used in a pediatric context, the same images would probably not be protected if they were displayed on an adult website. Unless you have the resources of, for example, Calvin Klein, and can afford the legal battle, play it safe and do not display any questionable images of minors on your website.
3. Federal Statutes:
Title 18 of the United States Code governs child pornography. See Chapter 110, Sexual Exploitation and Other Abuse of Children. 18 U.S.C. § 2256 defines “Child pornography” as:
“any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct, where -
(A) the production of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct;
(B) such visual depiction is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct;
(C) such visual depiction has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or
(D) such visual depiction is advertised, promoted, presented, described, or distributed in such a manner that conveys the impression that the material is or contains a visual depiction of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct . . .”
Section 2256 clearly defines images of minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct as “Child Pornography.” It also, however, adds to that definition images that appear to depict a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct, and images or advertisements that suggest images of minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct. Does that mean that adult websites that display sexually explicit images of legal-age models in pigtails with a lollipop, while surrounded by stuffed animals, can be prosecuted under Child Pornography laws? The short answer is yes. Future prosecutions will determine which direction the law is going. See our Website Prosecutions page for a few examples of current adult website legal issues.
If your adult website displays images that arguably appear to have minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct, make sure that you are prepared. You should have the proper legal forms that you need to comply with federal record keeping requirements, and you should have a lawyer who has already seen your adult website(s) and has some idea about what arguments he or she will make if you are prosecuted. You should also have plenty of money and a desire to make the headlines. Remember, if you are prosecuted for violating child pornography laws, a jury will decide whether the content on your adult website is child pornography. Without a doubt, some juries will see child pornography where there is none.
4. Sexually Explicit Conduct:
18 U.S.C. § 2252 prohibits the production, transportation, or knowing receipt or distribution of any visual depiction “of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct.” For the purposes of Title 18, 18 U.S.C. § 2256 defines a “minor” as any person under the age of eighteen years, and “sexually explicit conduct” as actual or simulated:
“(A) sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex;
(B) bestiality;
(C) masturbation;
(D) sadistic or masochistic abuse; or
(E) lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person”
“Sexual intercourse” and “bestiality” (sex with an animal) seem pretty clear – if your website displays images that a prosecutor believes involve minors engaged in sexual intercourse or bestiality, expect to be prosecuted. Which acts constitute “masturbation” or “sadistic or masochistic abuse” may be more difficult to define, because participants engaged in such activities tend to do so for a sexual purpose. Clearly a child could appear to be engaged in such activities without intending a sexual purpose. What a child intends by his or her actions is irrelevant, however, because Federal law prohibits “simulated” as well as actual acts. Many states also address this issue by prohibiting images of minors touching or displaying their bodies “for the purpose of sexual stimulation of the viewer.” (See, for example, California Penal Code §§ 311.3-312.7).
Section (E) prohibits images of “lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area.” Courts that have interpreted this section have done so broadly – “as used in the child pornography statute, the ordinary meaning of the phrase “lascivious exhibition” means a depiction which displays or brings forth to view in order to attract notice to the genitals or pubic area of children, in order to excite lustfulness or sexual stimulation in the viewer.” See United States v Knox (1994). You may risk prosecution if your website displays images of minors depicted in a way that excites viewers.
5. United States v Knox:
In Knox, a man who had previously been convicted of receiving child pornography through the mail ordered video tapes (by mail) of girls between the ages of ten and seventeen who, in the Court’s words, “were dancing or gyrating in a fashion not natural for their age.” The girls wore bikini bathing suits, leotards, or underwear – none of the girls in the videos was nude. The videos were set to music, and it appeared that someone off-camera was directing the girls. The photographer videotaped the girls dancing, and zoomed in on each girl’s pubic area for an extended period of time. Knox was prosecuted under United States Child Pornography laws.
Legal counsel for Knox argued that “lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area” meant that the girls had to be nude – wearing clothing meant that that genitals and pubic area were clearly not exhibited. The Court disagreed and held that there was no nudity requirement in the statute: “the statutory term “lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area,” as used in 18 U.S.C. § 2256(2)(E), does not contain any requirement that the child subject’s genitals or pubic area be fully or partially exposed or discernible through his or her opaque clothing.”
6. Unanswered Questions:
The Courts will likely continue to define what is prohibited under the child pornography laws. For example, if a website displays legal images of children, perhaps scanned from magazines and other legal sources, in a way that a prosecutor believes could excite some viewers, can that website be prosecuted under the child pornography laws? In many states and countries the age of consent is younger than 18. Can the USA prosecute a webmaster in another country who is displaying images of a 16 year old nude model, even if the images are not illegal in the webmaster’s home country? The USA invades other countries to enforce its drug laws, so it’s possible that webmasters in other countries might find themselves hauled to the USA to face criminal charges if they violate USA child pornography laws.
7. Conclusion:
If you want to be safe, do not display any images of minors on your adult website and do not advertise or suggest that your models are minors. If your website displays any arguably sexual images of minors, you may risk prosecution if it appears that your site exists for the sexual stimulation of viewers. If you display any questionable images of minors on your website, make sure you have a good lawyer. If you have any questionable images on your site, but you know that the model depicted is of legal age, make sure that you have the necessary legal records you will need to produce if you are prosecuted.
these are the main points i have found:
1)18 U.S.C. § 2252 prohibits the production, transportation, or knowing receipt or distribution of any visual depiction “of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct.” For the purposes of Title 18, 18 U.S.C. § 2256 defines a “minor” as any person under the age of eighteen years, and “sexually explicit conduct” as actual or simulated:
2)Section 2256 clearly defines images of minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct as “Child Pornography.” It also, however, adds to that definition images that appear to depict a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct, and images or advertisements that suggest images of minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct. Does that mean that adult websites that display sexually explicit images of legal-age models in pigtails with a lollipop, while surrounded by stuffed animals, can be prosecuted under Child Pornography laws? The short answer is yes. Future prosecutions will determine which direction the law is going. See our Website Prosecutions page for a few examples of current adult website legal issues.:::::::this pretty much says that anything that even sugjests child pornogrophy is considerd illegal>>>>>>>>>
3)Title 18 of the United States Code governs child pornography. See Chapter 110, Sexual Exploitation and Other Abuse of Children. 18 U.S.C. § 2256 defines “Child pornography” as:
“any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct, where -
(A) the production of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct;
(B) such visual depiction is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct;
(C) such visual depiction has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or
(D) such visual depiction is advertised, promoted, presented, described, or distributed in such a manner that conveys the impression that the material is or contains a visual depiction of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct . . .” ::::::::::::::::::this part says that if it “…appears to be, of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct” it is considerd to be illegal
from:http://www.adultweblaw.com/laws/childporn.htm AdultWebLaw Copyright 1998-2002 © All Rights Reserved
nick m c
Mar 5th, 2007
the above was by me these are some of the legal forms needed to partially protect from prosocution * Model Information – Use this legal form to collect the information you need to have for each model that appears on your adult website. Complies with the federal record keeping requirements contained in 18 USC Section 2257.
* Model Release Agreement – Make sure that any pictures or video you produce with live models will be available for any use you can think of now and in the future. This Model Release Agreement secures your legal rights to any pictures or video you take of a model.
* Index Warning Page – This is a basic legal warning page that should precede the adult content on your adult website. Using this legal warning page does not guarantee that you won’t be prosecuted, but it does show that you’re trying to warn visitors about the content on your adult website.
* Non-Disclosure Agreement – If you hire anyone to work on any part of your adult website, get a written promise from them not to take your great ideas and use them to compete with you, or to help others compete with you.
* Notice of Compliance – Place this Notice on your adult website to show that you have complied with the Federal record keeping requirements of 18 USC Section 2257.
any questions or comments (especialy if u find a flaw in my research ) please contact me by email at nickcannito@yahoo.com
You don't need to know
Mar 8th, 2007
It’s all based on RELIGIOUS values. Calling them morals doesn’t change the fact that they are based entirely upon religion. I say let people who want to participate participate. If they aren’t forcing it on you, then it’s none of your business, and you’re just applying religious persecution.
Jimhawkss
Mar 21st, 2007
This is a rare but uncurable disease known as nephritis, many of you may know it as Gary Coleman Disease.
At any rate I personally am familiar with someone that has nephritis.
Her body stopped growing at the age of nine.
She is thirty eight, and is a close friend of mine. This is a person that can’t go out of her house with out being treated like a child by people both the same age and younger then her. She will never be legally able to drive, and trying to find cloths in her size that aren’t childish is rather hard.
A person like that can’t ever have a picture taken of them, or even be in a home movie, that in any way may be considered even the slightest amount provocative. For either would constitute child pornography. In addition for her relations are rather difficult. When she goes out on dates most people mistake her for her date’s daughter and again treat her like a child.
I personally don’t know, but I’m sure intercourse for her would be a rather harse ordeal as well. Her body is that of a nine year olds.
I will admit that child pornography is deplorable, but not allowing poeple freedoms is even worse. Freedom comes in many forms, and can be taken away from people with ease. Most of you on this little discussion haven’t stopped to think of the implications that this discussion brings up. First of all, do any of you know Sasami in real life? If not that you can’t judge her/him. If so then you wouldn’t be on this rant page.
Secondly, do any of you know any children that play the game? Considering you have to buy your account with a credit card and except a EULA only adults, or minor’s with parents consent, are allowed to play. If a minor is playing it is up to the parent of that child to deturmine whether or not the game is appropriate for them, not whether the game should be censored. Finally, I am sure the monitors of Second Life have worked long and hard to keep real child pornography out of their system. Second Life is based in the United States and is subject to the laws of the United States. They can in no way harbor or host any form of Child Pornography without, banning the user, deleting the information from the public eye, and contacting the authorities.
With all of that being said one must also realize. The art-form (erotica it may be) has a style name to it. It is known as Lolicon (Lolikon). Which according the the United States is perfectly legal at this time.
Greaper6
Mar 31st, 2007
Real child porn = bad, fake child porn = no bad..
Hell even some kids Want it. If they want it, they should get it.
Im not saying that some guy or woman should rape a kid, but if you computer (Virtual) kiddy porn, you should do that. And not harm any kid that doesn’t want it or your self.
Signed; Greaper6
He Who Wandered By
Apr 12th, 2007
ANYBODY who supports child pornography, real or imagined, is simply a damned pedophile. ANYBODY who supports anybody dealing with this sickness is a pedophile too. There’s no excuse for this nonesense. None.
Anonymous
Apr 17th, 2007
so what about if you are a “child” into “child” porn? thats one thing that has ramished into my mind reading all of this.
Would it be alright. Even tho……. *EVen tho…….. RL and SL are trying to keep minors out. What if children are into that stuff?
Mak Manto
Apr 22nd, 2007
Child pornograpgy is disgusting, and should be dealt with, but this doesn’t fall in the same category.
As many posters above stated, the user is over 700+. Besides, the picture is of hentai. It’s not child pornograpgy but hentai. I don’t know what their rules state on hentai, but it’s not child porno.
Toki
Apr 22nd, 2007
i think its hawt
Anonymous
Apr 30th, 2007
http://www.flatchan.org BE THERE
sleepingbeauty
May 3rd, 2007
I feel as long as the RL person is not doing anything that is against the law in their country, and that LL has not decided to do anything with their own internal systems against that person than it is ok for them to do as they wish.
Someone posted if you do not like what is written here then do not read it. If you do not like what is displayed in SL then do not go to those areas.
An escort is not a prostitute. The word escort has become synominous with prostitution over the years but an escort is and will always be first and formost a chaperone, tempory partners and formal company. What the escort decides to do with their time is up to them.
Furries and beastiality are not the same thing. If you show me a RL human screwing a RL werewolf then I will change that opinion.
wisp
May 9th, 2007
It’s funny how the public acuses SL-users from not being able to distinguise between real and fantasy, while at the same time people are being charged for virtual acts on virtual persona.
Anonymous
May 10th, 2007
What about drugs and bongs on SL,you can buy them on SL,but in my city in RL this is against the law.How far do you want to go, some things that are against the law in real life are ok on SL and others are not.
see you.
4chan
May 13th, 2007
hahahahaha holy christ you people are soft
it’s a fucking game. get out of your basements you sad fucks
Ray
May 27th, 2007
The thing I think some of you might be missing is that realspace (Reality)child porn has a real children in it, and those children are 95% of the time, traumatized. The trauma can show up as a wide variety of forms. Everything from extreme distrust of people (Same or opposite gender), to a nuerosis like nymphomania (Sex is love and care concept), right down to suicidal depression. THAT is the reason that child sex is illegal. The act causes semi-permanent psychological (And in many cases, physical) damage.
a regular guy
Jun 1st, 2007
man those pics are hot, too bad the uncensored stuff is so hard to find. its a cartoon you idiots, get over yourselves.
the sad part is you ppl all turn your heads at a hot 16 yr old at think bad thoughts all the time. ur just too panzy ass bitch to admit it.
cartoons are victimless, the character doesnt even exist- so just let people beat their meat to the good hentai shit
cid
Jun 14th, 2007
Hey, this totally should be allowd, there is nothign wrong with pictures that arnt real of somtething. You people that all think this is wrong need to get over it. Alot of things in this world are wrong but just because your opinion is that its wrong doesnt make it wrong. In other parts of the world people get married and have kids at the age of 14, because they only life til 30, So this is not wrong. Just your biased opinion.
Alex
Jul 1st, 2007
This is completely legal, does not create a problem… and keeps pedos from harassing real children.
This is perfectly fine, let’s continue having it exist in the world.
Summja
Jul 10th, 2007
I agree with many of the people who have already posted. You are unprofessional, mentioning a specific person was unnecessary. You could have just mentioned that people were using what YOU felt was child pornography and mentioned that the issue needs to be addressed.
Furthermore as an outsider to this game and this fourm I must say when I first read you article I honestly thought you were a 12 year old who was just trash talking, because any respecting journalist would not be so bluntly biased. Your job is to be objective.
Also, please remember that Second Life is a game. Would you consider a 25 year old who looks young child pornography? No. This is very similar. His/her character is an adult who looks young.
Finally, I suggest “Sasami” and anyone else who may be targeted in the future should not take this article (or any article by this journalist) seriously because he/she is just an amature who is unprofessional and obviously very immature.
rocky
Sep 24th, 2007
ok according to us law the onlything thta you can get in trouble for with someting like this is if you are found to have porn of real lifee kids on your hard drive or in your home then this only adds to the sentence but by itself the us government doesnt care about virtual or fantasy characters engaging in sexual acts
Chris
Sep 29th, 2007
Even if the pavatar is 708 yrs old I think this crap shouldn’t be allowed. I’m digusted to hear all these news of perverted child porn. I looked up in google for virtual child, to play a game of nursery or of taking care of a virtual child. But no, all I see are these child porn cases which should obviosly be in one decision. Eliminate all child porn and anything related to it. 708 yr old avatar is technically legal, but it shouldn’t be alowed.
Vincent F.
Oct 25th, 2007
Sasami has clearly broken copyright laws and should be punished to the full extent of the law. Regardless of him/her acting out “child pornography fantasies”.
mrmr
Jan 20th, 2008
Nothing technically illegal here if all participants are of age. Its just weird…. i feel like its neither here nor there. Sex in 3d world is just a weird thing. at most, I just wanna go to a 3d porn shop and buy some 2d movies….and watch it offline….sex involves…flesh and the closest thing to this would be shared video so you can SEE the flesh of the other person. Avatars…as they stand now…are cartoon characters. Perhaps if avatars ARE you (some sort of live video of you placed into a shared vr environment ) then… I can see your flesh and your movement.
but cartoon characters?
a
Mar 2nd, 2008
wow go gizz on your self DANG
Sasami
Apr 13th, 2008
Why are you guys saying that my porn is illigal??? Its super horny so fuck off and make your own porn, then we’ll see if thats illigal.
Anonymous
Feb 19th, 2009
This topic and the comments amuse me. I’m sorry, but they just do xD
les
Oct 27th, 2009
I THINK ITS GREAT.
WHERE CAN I GET IT?