Robin Linden confirms today, what Daniel Linden said a while back.

Taken from today's post, written by Robin Linden:

Voluntary Status
As currently implemented, age verification and parcel flagging to create adults-only restricted areas rely completely on voluntary participation. However, there is no assurance that either feature will always be voluntary for all Second Life Residents. It’s possible, for example, that we could be required at some point to make one of these features mandatory for the citizens of a specific country. Should that happen, we will do everything we can to provide maximum advance warning.

This echoes Daniel Linden's position from way back, that they'd make Age Verification mandatory across the board if they felt self-regulation had failed.

From Aristotle/Integrities point of view, this is an absolute goldmine. They collect a huge amount of new information, then if at some point LL goes bust they're free to do whatever they want because of the clause in the ToS that says in the event of LL's bankruptcy, there will be no liability for misuse of any data collected during SL's existence.

I may be a little paranoid, but I can actually picture Aristotle being poised to make a grab for ALL the data for a sum of money, in the event Linden Labs goes into receivership. From their point of view, it's a win-win situation.

Hat tip also to Nika Talaj, who points out:

May 2007:“[10:12] Daniel Linden: it’s vaulted to provided a government-required audit trail for two years, but neither Linden or Integrity can access that data unless an audit is initiated.”

Which is essentially my beef with them about the PATRIOT act. They HAVE to store this data. Just dumping it is against the law. You can't claim that just because it's 'sealed in a vault' it doesn't exist. Either it's being retained or it's not, and by the PATRIOT act's requirements it has got to be retained, for two years. Vaults can be cracked. A lot can happen in two years. We've been lied to a LOT by Linden Labs over this. Our details will be retained for two years, as is the law where Linden Labs is.

Sorry, but no. This won't work voluntarily, at which point they'll make it mandatory. Then push will come to shove, and those who are serious in their threat to leave - myself included - will do so. At that point, either LL will survive, or it will fold. If it folds, I'm betting Aristotle will get all the data that's ever been held by Linden Labs in whatever form, and hold a bidding party over who gets it first.

This isn't the way to treat your customers, Linden Labs.

Age Verification argument rages on

There seems to be three camps developing among residents with reference to age verification.

The first want it, have done it (or not, depending on whether Integrity actually has their information) and are annoyed at everyone else who doesn't want it.

The second is those who are generally okay with it. These are normally non-US residents whose only reservation is whether or not they are breaking the privacy laws in their own countries. More often than not, the age verification process fails for them anyway, but they're willing to try it.

The third camp is the one that I - and the vast majority of Residents - are in. That is, we don't want it, we won't use it, we won't flag our land and we'll inform relevant authorities where we see breaches of the law. In my case, since I live in Canada, I don't break the law if I voluntarily give my Social Insurance Number (SIN) to Linden Labs or Integrity, BUT, if I choose not to, Linden Labs DO break the law in Canada the moment that they deny me access to something on the grounds I haven't given my SIN number to them.

A pattern is beginning to emerge about Integrity's database. A number of people have failed to verify with their current data, but have managed to verify with data several years out of date. This indicates that Integrity are gathering public records to add to their database, but these records are often out of date. In the UK, for example, they buy data from the credit check company Equifax (which performs credit checks on consumers) however, Equifax only have data about those who have applied for credit in one form or another, or who have home facilities. Take my 42 year old brother, a sad individual who still lives with his parents. He's never applied for a credit card, hasn't bothered to tell the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency the last three or four times he's moved house, doesn't bother with bank accounts (he lives off welfare, cashing his cheque every two weeks at a post office who know him and never bother to ask for ID) - He wouldn't be on Equifax's database. He holds a driving license and passport, but has never had the internet at home. He is on the electoral roll, but the list that is not available to the general public (only available to government bodies).

As a test, I asked him to try age verification. Surprise surprise, it failed, despite the fact that the data he provided was correct. However, what was most interesting was he provided state information (passport number and driving license) - which would NOT normally be available to anyone but the UK government. It wasn't in Integrity's database. Which leads me to have serious doubts that their claims their data is taken from governments worldwide is genuine.

To me, Integrity has always seemed like a data mining company, that gets its profits by acquiring tiny pieces of the huge jigsaw that is a persons life, putting those pieces together and selling the completed picture for far more than the individual pieces cost. By age verifying, what a person actually does is to alert Integrity to their existence. Nobody has been able to find a privacy policy for Integrity, but my guess is that it's something like the policy for facebook; by providing them with ANY information, you expressly authorise them to collect any and all information they can about you, including but not limited to, credit card data, bank data, address data, religion, voting preference, membership of clubs etc etc. In other words, anyone trying to age verify with Linden Labs systems, whether they pass or fail, is actually authorising Integrity to start data mining on them. Again, this IS only my guess, but until someone can find a privacy policy I'm standing by this opinion, bearing in mind the discovery that it was indeed the case for Facebook.

And this is what makes it dangerous. Particularly the section in Linden Labs own terms of service, that states in the event of bankruptcy, Linden Labs can no longer be held responsible for anything done with ANY data collected by the Second Life system. Linden Labs remains completely silent on the questions being thrown at them by residents along the lines of "What guarantee do WE have that your third party company (Integrity) won't misuse or sell our information." And the answer to that is simple. None at all.

Looking at it from a legal point of view, a resident makes a contract with Linden Labs when they sign up, for the provision of a service called "Second Life" in return for complying honestly with their terms of service (it's far more complicated than this, of course, but this is what it boils down to in its simplest form) - This means that the resident, as a consumer, and Linden Labs, as a service provider, can hold one another liable in the event that one breaks the conditions. As it's part of the terms of service that users of the adult grid are over 18, anyone who isn't and uses the service is in breach from the moment they log in for the first time. Bringing a third party into it, however, muddies the waters.

Since a resident has not agreed to anything with this third party, there is no contract, and nothing to regulate the residents behaviour toward the third party or the third parties use of any collected residents data. Effectively what this means is a resident is perfectly at liberty to be totally dishonest with the third party, because there's no agreement to stick to, but it also means the third party is equally at liberty to do whatever the hell it wants with whatever data it does get provided. No agreement, no contract, no protection.

Some Residents will sign up to age verification right away (and indeed, some already have). Some will be willing to sign up when the database is more complete and they're likely to be on it. Most will refuse point blank to give this data. When push comes to shove, and it becomes mandatory, Linden Labs will risk their existence as a corporate entity on getting enough people to use the system. Ultimately, if enough rebel and leave, the costs of running Second Life will rapidly overtake the revenue - at which point, bye bye Linden Labs.

In closing, try this for a bit of fun. I created a facebook based on my best friend from school's details, except in the facebook account she lives in Canada, has a much more glamorous job, is a member of a number of respectable organisations and is most definately over 18. I created this facebook account when Age Verification was first being discussed for Second Life, so it's a over six months old now. Using a fictitious Ontario driving license number and a fictitious passport number, both authentic in the layout of their numbers and special characters, I tried to take her through Age Verification, using the same details with Integrity as I had put on her Facebook profile - and passed, proving that one of Integrity's sources is indeed facebook. The only problem with this is - she doesn't actually exist as a Canadian citizen, and her birthdate as given in her facebook account is one day wrong from her actual birthdate. Also, her address is the middle of a cemetery, but the postcode and street number do exist.

She's now verified. The thing is, she doesn't actually exist (with the details I provided to Integrity) so she should not have passed the age verification. I'm betting somewhere there's a very puzzled computer failing miserably to put together the missing pieces on her. This just shows how much of a sham Integrity's system is, and in my mind vilifies my position: I'm not using this system, ever, and if it gets made mandatory, I'll say goodbye to Second Life.

Another nail in the coffin

The storm has once again broken out on the official Linden Blog with the announcement that age verification will be introduced with viewer version 1.18. Predictably, Linden Labs have released this well before it's ready (as usual) and there are a mass of problems with it, even if you don't count the fact that the actual age verification system doesn't work.

Firstly they've bought a registered digital certificate with their entire domain in it, which isn't accepted by most modern browsers. Firefox in particular refuses to take "secondlife.com" as valid when it's visiting a site where some of the features in a page are secure and some are not. The result of this is that Firefox displays a warning that the certificate may not be genuine, because some of the content comes from http: and some comes from https: - users aren't told by the browser what the difficulty is, only that the certificate is not fully valid to cover the page that is being loaded, but this is the page that they are being asked to put their personally identifiable information on - not a good sign.

Secondly, it's illegal in some countries to provide this information, and this means that even if someone does so it can't legally be verified. Aristotle/Integrity will add it to their database, but they have no means of verifying it. Although they claim to have data from all over the world, I do seriously have doubts about the legality of verifying such data.

Thirdly, 90% of Second Life users DO NOT WANT THIS. Some - myself included - won't be able to verify anyway, due to things like only just having emigrated from one country to another. When I came to Canada, I gave my UK license to the Ontario ministry of transportation, who then issued me with a driving license number in Ontario - but if you cross reference my driving license with any other database, you won't find a match, because as of yet I still don't have a Canadian passport. So you can't check my Canadian driving license against my UK passport because they don't share that information, and you can't verify my UK license against my UK passport because my UK license has been canceled due to having an Ontario license instead. So even if I wanted to do this, I'd fail the procedure, and several people have already responded to the Linden Blog posting with tales of woe about using genuine details and being declined.

This will kill Second Life off. It's going to be the final nail in the coffin. As sim owners are threatened with banning for not marking their entire sims as "adult" just because one vendor, somewhere on their sim, sells a prim-penis or cage, so the revenue from these land owners will die. As organizations like CARP can't raise their tier because half their members no longer play owing to either being against age verification altogether, or unable to verify - so those sims will also vanish because their owners can't afford to pay tier. Newcomers to Second Life will be asked to age verify immediately or threatened that they can't see some content, and either they'll refuse to verify and not sign up, or they'll fail verification and not sign up, so the new revenue stream will dry up.

Seriously, Linden Labs, you could achieve a much better method of disclaiming responsibility for underage misuse of the grid if you made everyone type a declaration manually into a textbox. Something along the lines of "I hereby certify that I am the account holder, over the legal age of consent in my country, and absolve Linden Labs and all their employees and representatives of responsibility for any actions that I may engage in when linked to this service." Granted you couldn't sign it, but if anyone accused Linden Labs of letting underage users in, what's the difference between someone typing that sentence into a box and someone providing details when you can't see that person? How does a child with their parents driving license and a child entering this paragraph differ?

Age verification cannot work over the internet. Not with the current technology. Maybe in years to come when everybodies details are on computer, and you can verify yourself by fingerprint, retina scan or facial scan, then there would be a foolproof way of making sure that an internet user was who they say they are, but that time isn't yet, and probably won't be for at least a decade. Even then it will be America, Canada, the UK and other such countries that will get it first, with other countries lagging behind by many years if not decades.

In the meantime, Linden Labs just banged another huge nail into the coffin that Second Life is destined to be buried in.

UPDATE: Take a look at this site, published by the Government of Canada - it proves that what Linden Labs is asking for is NOT something the Canadian Government agrees with:

The Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) sets out ground rules for how private sector organizations may collect, use or disclose personal information in the course of commercial activities.

Since January 1, 2001, the Act applied to personal information about customers or employees that is collected, used or disclosed by the federally-regulated sector in the course of commercial activities. It also applies to information that is sold across provincial and territorial boundaries. As of January 1, 2004, the Act covers the collection, use and disclosure of personal information in the course of any commercial activity within a province, including provincially-regulated organizations, except in provinces that have enacted legislation that is deemed to be substantially similar to the federal law.

Under the new law, organizations like banks, telecommunications companies and airlines cannot require you to consent to the collection, use or disclosure of your personal information unless it is required for a specific and legitimate purpose.

This means that unless an organization can demonstrate that your SIN is required by law, or that no alternative identifier would suffice to complete the transaction, you cannot be denied a product or service on the grounds of your refusal to provide your SIN.

In other words, if Linden Labs refuse me access to a SIM on the grounds I won't provide my Social Insurance Number to them, they are committing an offense by Canadian law. And why is it so important?

Computer technology makes it possible to use the SIN to find and match your information from one database to another; without your knowledge, a detailed profile could be drawn about you. This amounts to "data surveillance" or monitoring of your daily life, which can pose a serious threat to our privacy and autonomy.

I don't see why other countries wouldn't have similar legislature.

Where does the line get drawn?

On Thursday after normal office hours, Daniel Linden posted the following:

The diversity of things to see and do within Second Life is almost unimaginable, but our community has made it clear to us that certain types of content and activity are simply not acceptable in any form. Real-life images, avatar portrayals, and other depiction of sexual or lewd acts involving or appearing to involve children or minors; real-life images, avatar portrayals, and other depictions of sexual violence including rape, real-life images, avatar portrayals, and other depictions of extreme or graphic violence, and other broadly offensive content are never allowed or tolerated within Second Life.

Please help us to keep Second Life a safe and welcoming space by continuing to notify Linden Lab about locations in-world that are violating our Community Standards regarding broadly offensive and potentially illegal content. Our team monitors such notification 24-hours a day, seven-days a week. Individuals and groups promoting or providing such content and activities will be swiftly met with a variety of sanctions, including termination of accounts, closure of groups, removal of content, and loss of land. It’s up to all of us to make sure Second Life remains a safe and welcoming haven of creativity and social vision.

This makes a disturbing ambiguity which really needs to be closed up. Especially worrying is his term "other broadly offensive content" which is neither defined nor elaborated on. Who defines what is "broadly offensive" and what is not, and where do Linden Labs stand on such a matter? If the owner of a banline using plot of land or sim decides that nude pictures of his avatar in compromising situations with another avatar is fine, or a picture of a nude real life model is fine, where do Linden Labs stand if someone disables their camera constraints to look into the sim and reports the content?

I'd very much like Daniel Linden - or any other responsible Linden - to say who would be responsible and what action might be taken under the following circumstances.

1. Open land, no group, no banlines. The land owner places a large image taken from the internet of two nude adults engaged in a sexual act. Is this unacceptable and if so, who gets punished and what would be the punishment? (I figured I'd start off with an easy one)
2. Open land, no group, no banlines. A visiting avatar places a large image taken from the internet of two nude adults engaged in a sexual act. Is this unacceptable and if so, who gets punished and what would be the punishment?
3. Group land, banlines for anyone not in the group. The land owner places a large image taken from the internet of two nude adults engaged in a sexual act. Is this unacceptable and if so, who gets punished and what would be the punishment?
4. Group land, banlines for anyone not in the group. A Group Member places a large image taken from the internet of two nude adults engaged in a sexual act. Is this unacceptable and if so, who gets punished and what would be the punishment?
5. A shopping mall, with an item vendor selling a BDSM item. The vendor has an image of a furry or human avatar trapped within the item, portrayed in an obviously uncomfortable or painful position. Does the owner of the vendor commit an offense meriting punishment? Does the owner of the mall also commit an offense for not returning the vendor? Could either be banned over it?
6. Open sim, free to join group, privately owned island. A visiting avatar leaves a prim decorated with underage sexual images, but sets it to group ownership so that it won't be autoreturned. Would just the avatar concerned be subject to action, or would the island sim owner also be subject to action for not discovering and returning the item?
7. This one's a doozy. Open sim, free to join group, privately owned island. A visiting avatar leaves prims containing explicit pictures of children being raped or tortured while the owner of the island/sim is away (on vacation for example). The content is reported to Linden Labs who then pass the blame to the sim owner and send an email instructing him to remove the content and/or ban the avatar that placed it. The owner, being on vacation and therefore not receiving the email, fails to comply. Would the owner return from vacation to find that their account had been closed, their land and possessions seized and their machine hash-blocked?
   

You can see from these few examples that there is no proper line that has been drawn by Linden Labs about what is "broadly offensive" and who exactly has to take responsibility for it. One thing is for sure, and that is that Linden Labs themselves don't want to be the sole responsible party - but where does the line get drawn? In a civilization specializing in shifting blame to other parties, would innocent accounts not responsible for the placing of "broadly offensive" content be as guilty as those actually placing the content? And are Linden Labs simply giving a free pass to anyone with a grudge against someone to pop over to that persons land, on a fake free account, and placing "broadly offensive" content so that he or she can get the person they hate banned?

Daniel, if you're going to ask the community for help, you're going to have to be far more specific about "broadly offensive" content; what it means, what it includes and excludes, and who will be to blame when it gets discovered. Yes, we all must play a part in keeping Second Life safe, but this isn't the way to inspire confidence. Don't be surprised when people don't use it for fear that they too might be warned or banned.

The contract is signed

Reuters are reporting that the contract between Integrity and Linden Labs was signed last Thursday. Effectively this means that time is up for suggesting alternative methods for age verification, and that Linden Labs haven't listened to us at all.

It remains to be seen how long it remains optional to give these details. In my many years of experience, I've seen it happen time and time again that something is introduced - normally for political reasons - as "optional" but has strings attached that really mean "mandatory". UK Identity Cards are a prime example. When the scheme starts, it will indeed be optional. Citizens will be able to decline an ID card - but what they have been hushing up as much as possible is small print in the legislation that states if you don't have an ID card, you have to surrender your passport. So if you ever want to travel, the ID card isn't optional, since possession of a passport will be dependent on "opting in" to have one.

Where, one wonders, do Linden Labs intend this Age Verification thing to go? What are the strings they're going to attach to it? The first one is obvious - adult content... But the definition of "adult" is not. Linden Labs seem to have been very eager to avoid a solid definition; could the reason for this be that they want it to be expandable? Today, young looking avatars - tomorrow, furries and any group they deem "unsuitable".

Linden Labs seem to be of the opinion that the Age Verification system should serve one primary purpose - to indemnify them from prosecution. But that's yet another can of worms. How far can it go, legally, to indemnifying them from content they host? Internet Service Providers - of which Linden could be counted one, being that they host a virtual world - and this means that they are ultimately responsible for any content they host. Age Verification won't change this. The original people caught by the German media were way past the age of consent; Age Verification won't change that either. Adults peddling in any kind of material deemed unsuitable in the country they live is still going to be illegal, and the hosting company responsible for making sure it's unavailable. Age verification won't change that.

The problem with hosting a cyberworld available to the entire globe is jurisdiction in law matters. Linden Labs are in a unique position here; what they're doing has never been done before. Integrity offers them the opportunity to comply with a number of law acts in America, but doesn't - some would say can't - offer to indemnify them against actions bought in another country. The downside of that is the apparent paranoia that is being handed down to the American people by their current government, with regards to personal data is not liked or trusted by their users. Even American users I've spoken too are angry about the data Integrity are asking them to hand over. Non American users are furious.

And indeed, there are still a number of issues that should be cleared up - (which, may I say, Linden Labs have not even TRIED to touch on thus far) - The first of which is security. Enough data was stolen from them in November 1996 for them to need to implement an emergency plan for credit card holders. They have to hold the personally identifiable details for two years to comply with the PATRIOT act. So far they've said nothing to reassure residents that they've done all they can to close the security loopholes the last hacker used.

Secondly, there's the issue of contracts. As residents, we have a contract enforceable by law, with Linden Labs. If Linden Labs do something questionable, we do have the courts to settle disputes. We have no such contract with Integrity. We may not even know if Integrity misuse our data until way after it is too late, and even then we would probably not have an avenue to seek any kind of compensation. In the case of none-US residents, this data (passport/national ID card/driving license number in full) represents a hitherto unseen amount of data to give over the internet - particularly just to play a game.

So, Linden Labs are going to start rolling age verification using Integrity out as soon as they possibly can. Many businesses within SL will have to flag themselves Adult to avoid the possibility of a widening definition resulting in bans. Before too long the grid will be more "adult" than mature or PG. And then Linden Labs will say "Well, the majority of the grid is adult, therefore the majority of users must be in favour of the grid being entirely adult, therefore from now on this isn't optional, it's mandatory."

Remember Thursday May 17th 2007. It just may have been the day that marked the downfall and eventual death of Second Life.

The storm breaks

This morning there was discussion on the group "SL'ers against age verification" about child avatar sellers having their products and vendors deleted. Two were banned when they complained in the forums.

This whole thing seems to be spiralling out of all control. Ageplay is already banned, which is one thing, but to start banning the sale of child-like avatars is quite a jump in censorship. It's ominous to consider that people actually wearing such avatars could be the next victims, and then where will it end? Certainly the furry community is worried about this escalation. If one could get banned for wearing a human child avatar, how long until someone says "Furries yiffing is virtual beastiality - get rid of it!" and overnight wearing a furry avatar becomes a banning offense?

I chaired a general informal meeting (at which a few tempers ran high) this morning on Support for Healing island. General consensus was that we're FOR protecting people but AGAINST the methodology being proposed, for a variety of reasons. Linden Labs record of vault security being the main one, since they're required by the PATRIOT act to keep records for two years.

The major difficulty with the internet is that without being able to see someone, face to face, you're always going to be able to be fooled by those determined enough. What Linden Labs are proposing, won't stop those who are out to break the law - which is the very demographic they're trying to prevent.

Instead what they are doing is going to impact a number of people, and if they at some future point decide to make it mandatory, not optional... it's going to impact everyone on Second Life. And I still see absolutely nothing which makes me believe that they aren't going to make this mandatory sometime soon.

The meeting discussed the various options; the flaws in public notary were discussed, but no major new ideas were put forward. We reached consensus that the entire exercise is purely aimed at protecting Linden Labs, rather than being concerned with protecting the privacy of residents. It does seem to be a halfway measure, though, since rational adults would not let their children onto adult second life and irrational adults will just con the system whatever Linden Labs put in place.

If this latest development - the banning of some people who sell childlike avatars - starts to develop into something more sinister, it will only perpetuate the belief that Linden Labs are only doing this to protect their own backs. As for an answer - well, we're all still looking... but surely there MUST be a better way to trust your customers than to demand they hand over personal details... musn't there?

Here's the mailing list

In a conversation between two Lindens and a group of concerned residents, Daniel and Robin Linden were backed into a corner, and forced to admit that yes - data WOULD be stored... For an entire TWO YEARS!

[10:12] Robin Linden: Tao the data is never saved to be deleted. It’s matched only
[10:12] Daniel Linden: it’s vaulted to provided a government-required audit trail for two years, but neither Linden or Integrity can access that data unless an audit is initiated.

Here's the mailing list, folks! Who wants a copy?

Seriously, you now have to ask who can initiate an audit? Can the RIAA? Can the US Department of Homeland Security? Can the DoJ? What about law organisations in other countries - will they be able to request an "audit" so that they can keep track of what their citizens are doing? And how secure IS this vault, given that Linden Labs failed to protect credit card details last year?

Unfortunately, as time passed, more questions arise than get answered. Linden Labs in fact haven't made ANY attempt to answer residents concerns. Their latest blog entry on the subject once again repeats the same things "It won't be stored, it's entirely optional, it's only for adult content" - well, we now know the FIRST of these things is a lie. It WILL be stored, as is a legal requirement. The second is only true for the moment; watch this space for that changing. And just wait until the anti-furry brigade starts making noises and it'll be extended to all sorts of things.

I've seen many complaints about upcoming features in my time here, but NOTHING - absolutely nothing - has come close to this. Whereas normally 10-15% of the population complain about something new while 85-90% like the idea, here it's the other way around. 85-90% of the residents do not want to give their personal data to someone on a non-contractual assurance that it won't be given or sold or shared with third parties.

It now looks as if the Electronic Frontier Foundation is thinking about getting involved - Linden Labs, you're playing with the big boys now. There may also be European Union concerns about privacy... believe me, this is a can of worms you don't want to be trying to open.

To be continued.

The cat is out of the bag

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6638331.stm

Second Life is being investigated by German police following allegations that some members are trading child abuse images in the online world.

The investigation follows a report by a German TV news programme which uncovered the trading group and members who pay for sex with virtual children.

The police are now trying to identify the Second Life members involved.

Linden Lab, the creator of Second Life, said it would help identify users and pass on details to prosecutors.

Unfortunately, they're obviously going about it the wrong way. Integrities name checks, by all account, don't work. One person who attempted to join bud.tv with their second life avatar name, a DOB that was over 21 and a genuine postcode that they obtained with a bit of work from multimap.com and the australian post office site was completely successful, despite the fact that the chances of someone with her second life avatar name living at the address she gave, born on the day she gave was practically nonexistant.

To all intents and purposes, Integrity appears to be a cover for Aristotle, a political database collection company in America. It is looking more and more as if they don't actually have access to all the databases that they claim to, which means that although they may make a claim they can indemnify Linden Labs according to US law - it's a big risk for LL to take. After all, if Integrity is a child-company (no pun about the current situation intended) then the parent company can let it collapse if it gets heavily sued, which means if it does collapse then LL may not have been indemnified after all, and can be sued - it may well collapse itself under such a burden.

Plus, there is a huge resident backlash building about Integrity, mainly because of the details they seek and their ties to a political database company. In a society where a prominant academic can be banned from flying for giving a speech critical to President Bush, there is a strong feeling that Big Brother is trying to get into Second Life, and residents resent this. If Linden Labs start making age verification mandatory, and the information Integrity wants is too intrusive, people will start leaving in huge numbers (assuming they don't just all use their second life avatar names, manufactured DOBs and genuine postcodes in different countries.)

We could well be seeing the last days of Second Life, which would be a real shame. They are in a tentative position legally, and could end up driving their own customer base away trying heavy handed methods of complying with the ever more intrusive and draconian laws that their virtual world touches on. Yes, of COURSE the paedophiles and child abusers were going to come to SL sooner or later, because their is no tracing and Linden Labs try to avoid interfering with residents land. Of COURSE they were going to set their land to entry-restricted by group. This is going to happen when you give people an easy avenue to do what they want. People will take it.

Then along comes your investigative reporter, who has spent a few months infiltrating these organisations, gets himself a group invite and suddenly it's front page news, and everyone is shocked and horrified about how "widespread" it is in SL - when it isn't widespread at all.

There has been no formal response from Linden Labs following the BBC's publication of the story. I will be interested to see what - if anything - they say... and where we go from here.

Storm Clouds Gather

Linden Labs have been forced to make a further blog post about their upcoming "Age Verification" plans in the light of what looks like the largest protests against anything the game has ever known.

Let's see what we know so far. To recap, Linden Labs want residents that wish to enter "adult" areas to provide substantial details which could include (for non-US residents) passport number information or identity card information as well as addresses and dates of birth. This information will be passed to a third party company that will create a kind of 'credit score' of it to decide whether or not a person will pass or fail age verification. Linden Labs have taken great pains to say that the information will not be stored... one might almost say TOO much pains, given the circumstances.

According to The Daily Telegraph newspaper in London, England the company chosen, Integrity, is at least half-owned by a consortium of investors that includes Rupert Murdoch, the famous media tycoon who owns - amongst other things - Fox News in the US and a number of tabloid newspapers in the UK. In addition, Integrity's parent company, Aristotle (who, incidentally, have a tagline of 'Power Tools for Politics') make no secret of selling mailing lists to a number of organisations, amongst them political parties. Integrity's privacy policy makes a very simple statement:

Confidentiality of Information/Correction
This site does not provide visitors' information to third parties

But that doesn't really say very much. The site might not - but what about the company? There is absolutely no guarantee that information passed to Integrity won't end up on a list which could conceivably be made available to whoever asks for it. In addition, I do feel we are being lied to from the start here. Linden Labs say no data will be stored. Integrity say nothing will be provided to third parties (though interestingly Integrity themselves do not say the information won't be stored) - but the 1996 Electronic Communications Transactional Act requires any internet company that is asked to, to store ALL records for up to 90 days and the US Attorney General is desperately trying to take that even further.

So this still doesn't set my mind at rest, in fact, alarm bells are going off all over the place. One suspect among the thousands of records, and ALL the records must be stored for 90 days? You can bet that quasi-legal organisations like the RIAA are rubbing their greedy little hands together over this, and they won't be the only ones. Not living in the US I don't particularly care if a political party marks me down as not liking them - unless of course that ends up directly impacting my life, for example the professor who criticized President Bush and ended up on the infamous "no-fly" list because of it. This is a perfect example of someone who got on a blacklist, somewhere, somehow and now is suffering for it. Extreme? Maybe - but this sort of thing DOES exist. It's not a tin hat theory, it's actually happening to people who get put on lists. How do residents of Second Life know that support for the wrong organisation in game isn't going to result on them getting on some blacklist out of game?

Over the past few days I've been doing a lot of research about this, and what I've learned makes me MORE worried than I was when first I heard about this. Yes, Second Life is a game. But the information being gathered is anything BUT a game. And if this information is stored someplace, then you can bet someone will want a copy - and if they get a copy, to whom will they give it and for what purposes will it be used?

I'm sorry Linden Labs. This is a place I don't intend to go. Not now, not ever. Not for you, not for any game company. When push comes to shove, the day you demand these details from me is the day I leave and never look back - and from the look of the various forums, I'm by no means the only one.