lea_ysaye: (annoyed - head goes bangbang)
([personal profile] lea_ysaye Aug. 4th, 2007 12:11 am)
From here, a reply from LJ Abuse to someone who inquired, if I understand it correctly:

The comment you are referring to is correct; the content does not meet the legal definition of child pornography. As other, more recent entries in the community explain, however, non-photographic content involving minors in sexual situations which does not contain serious artistic or literary merit is likely in violation of Federal obscenity laws, and is content LiveJournal has chosen not to host.


The standard for artistic merit is not whether a work simply has technical merit; it is whether there is serious artistic value that offsets the sexual nature of the content. A group consisting of members of LiveJournal's Abuse Prevention Team, LiveJournal employees, and Six Apart staff reviewed the content that was reported to us. This group decides whether material potentially in violation of this policy warrants consideration for serious artistic value. In this case, they clearly did not see serious artistic value in content that simply displayed graphic sexual acts involving minors.
(bolding mine)

I am sorry, but what the frack is that supposed to mean?! Who are these people to be allowed to judge what has artistic merit and what doesn't? (ETA: And how can "artistic merit" offset sexual context? If photographs of little naked girls are done "really well and with style" are these okay then, too? Sorry for being a bit polemic here...) And especially here, when the images in question clearly were created by someone who engages in fandom art. And as [livejournal.com profile] erestor is pointing out in a recent post, there are plenty of communities out there where members make misogynistic, racist and homophobic comments, to real people. If LJ would crack down on these, often well-known, places as hard as on this here, I might not object so much. But they don't. I rarely speak out against things I see on the net, because it's just fruitless, but this is not just anywhere, LJ is like home, as I said before. And if my or other's freedom of expression is not guaranteed, how are we supposed to feel on here, eh?

I will take a day or two to consider the matter, and I might not have another choice but to leave LJ. This is just...I have no words.

From: [identity profile] thejennabides.livejournal.com

Thank you for this link! This also answers one of the questions I had about how they are defining "community" for the purposes of the Miller test. Unless I have misunderstood, they are defining community as themselves. This seems contradictory to the statement from a June 8 post by Barak Berkowitz:

One thing that people have been upset about has been the implication that the community standards would be set by Six Apart and not the community. I agree, and I was wrong to imply that. Six Apart is a critical part of the community (with the help of our paid users, we pay for bandwidth, employ the staff, and run the servers), but clearly the LiveJournal team and the LiveJournal users have a critical role in defining what is acceptable on LiveJournal. We know we can learn a lot from other communities that use a combination of reputation software and human judgment to gauge community opinion, and we are now actively exploring how we can let the community "vote" on what is acceptable content in order to create greater consistency.


From: [identity profile] mintogrubb.livejournal.com

Whilst I fully understand and support your reasons for quitting in protest, i shall still miss you.

* big hugs*


lea_ysaye: (Default)
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags