?

Log in

No account? Create an account

msilverstar

yet another wtf? LJ post

« previous entry | next entry »
Aug. 18th, 2007 | 06:14 pm
mood: angry

perseph2hades has a post that nails the LJ debacle. Read that now, I'll wait.

My opinion is that LJ management apparently has complete fluff-for-brains and a sincere desire eject child pornography, but are not able to tell the difference between photographs of harm being done to children and drawings of fictional characters of indeterminate age.

It's all very well and good when they apologize, but then they give artists one "strike" for pictures that have been annotated with ages above 18 and/or deleted from their scrapbook but retained in the system cache!

They're going far beyond even the Bush administration, how about that? From the New York Times (reg. required): Federal Effort on Web Obscenity Shows Few Results: In the last few years, 67,000 citizens’ complaints have been deemed legitimate under the program and passed on to the Justice Department and federal prosecutors. The number of prosecutions resulting from those referrals is zero.

So much for legal obligations of LJ, because we know there's really gross stuff out there. Including videos of people being beheaded. Drawings of clearly consensual sex including fictional teenagers are not exactly a threat to anyone.

Given that LJ has screwed this up, over and over, I wonder what else they're going to do? I'm slowly reducing my dependence on LJ, crossposting to IJ, GJ, and JF and reading in that order. I have a reading filter on LJ and will be commenting on other journal systems first. It's not much, but it's something I can and will do.

Link | Leave a comment |

Comments {10}

(no subject)

from: darklocket
date: Aug. 19th, 2007 03:22 am (UTC)
Link

The thing that drives me nuts is the way LJ/6A have rode roughshod over the issue of intellectual property - for instance, if I decide to deposit five years of diaries and unpublished manuscripts with secure storage company X, I have the right to assume they won't make a bonfire of my life's work without asking me first, just on the basis that they don't approve of the content.

The words in my livejournal are my 'property' and any wanton destruction of them is theft, in the same way as if someone came into my house and ran off with my hard drive...or am I being naive here?

Reply | Thread

Lotripper

(no subject)

from: msilverstar
date: Aug. 19th, 2007 05:37 am (UTC)
Link

Well, that one's tricky. They're not pretending to be providing a secure storage service, so legally don't have a lot of recourse -- we probably couldn't sue for loss of property or anything. We should make lots of backups, I guess. And go somewhere that has more respect for their customers who happen to produce the content that makes their system work. ARGH.

Reply | Parent | Thread

(no subject)

from: darklocket
date: Aug. 19th, 2007 06:07 am (UTC)
Link

I know...realistically there is no legal recourse, but it's the principle of the thing. A lot of people uploaded their journals onto lj in the understanding that it would be more private and secure than scribbling into a notebook and hiding it under the mattress...or whatever...apparently not. :{

Reply | Parent | Thread

Persephone

(no subject)

from: perseph2hades
date: Aug. 19th, 2007 05:45 pm (UTC)
Link

I wouldn't presume there's no legal recourse until a court tells you there's none.

Creating a website on which people can, to use your example, "deposit five years of diaries and unpublished manuscripts", some of whom pay for this service, might have created a contractual obligation (based on
reliance
by the user - i.e. even just a quasi-contractual obligation) or at the very least a legal duty of care on LJ's part.

Deleting said content without warning to the user might then be a breach of that contract or negligence in their duty of care.

Courts will look at the provisions of a contract -- for example "your honor, we're not pretending to be providing a secure storage service" -- but they also look at the practice that's been going on between the parties over the years to see where the duties realistically lie.

I ran both scenarios, which are basic tenants of contract and tort law, by another friend of mine (we're both attorneys) and she couldn't even believe 6A had actually done such a thing. Imagine if the content held serious commercial value to say an established publisher and the owner had not had a change to back up, based on years on reliance of LJ as their archive.

Only in fandom would we let a service provider get clean away with something like this.

Reply | Parent | Thread

Lotripper

(no subject)

from: msilverstar
date: Aug. 19th, 2007 06:43 pm (UTC)
Link

Huh, I assumed that all the weasel-words in the TOS would give them immunity from liability on loss of data. But the whole suspend-without-warning process was clearly ethically and morally wrong, and courts do seem to care about that.

Reply | Parent | Thread

Persephone

(no subject)

from: perseph2hades
date: Aug. 19th, 2007 06:53 pm (UTC)
Link

All the weasel-words in the world never stopped anyone from being held legally accountable. Otherwise people would just write their own tickets for a free rough-shod ride through society. Judges generally care a lot about the effects of their decisions on public policy. And in America, case law, not a generic TOS, really is the law.

grrr. I would so love to see them slapped with an injunction.

Reply | Parent | Thread

Rosamunde Brownlocks

(no subject)

from: rosamundeb
date: Aug. 19th, 2007 04:15 am (UTC)
Link

You're right - she has some very good points. Question is - where is everybody going?

Reply | Thread

Lotripper

(no subject)

from: msilverstar
date: Aug. 19th, 2007 05:38 am (UTC)
Link

Some people are, some are thinking, some don't take it seriously. If a fanfic author gets a "first strike", though, that might be enough to get more fandom people to leave.

Reply | Parent | Thread

Coco

(no subject)

from: hyacinth_sky747
date: Aug. 19th, 2007 11:42 pm (UTC)
Link

I think it's HIGHLY unlikely that a fic author will get called onto the carpet. Any child in America can walk into any bookstore and buy Under the Rooftops of Paris, or Anne Rice's Beauty series. They're not marked as pornographic in any way. They're usually just shelved with all the other fiction and you don't need to present ID to buy them. (And there are sexual encounters with children in both these books)

In that sense Barnes and Noble etc. are actually less responsible in regards to protecting minors than we are. Most fic writers at least mark their fiction as only being appropriate for mature audiences.

Now I want to go look through the art and manga sections of my local bookstore and see what kind of visual "porn" they're "hosting".

Reply | Parent | Thread

Lotripper

(no subject)

from: msilverstar
date: Aug. 19th, 2007 07:10 pm (UTC)
Link

Oops, misread the question. The current movement is towards insanejournal, as being more coherent and less arbitrary than greatestjournal and journalfen.

Reply | Parent | Thread