because it helps if you say the same thing in new words

Oh! They clarified!

We're seeing a lot of confusion in the comments to our previous post. Our intention is to provide clarification, not to create concern. All it says is that things that are illegal under United States law aren't allowed here, either.

Somehow I must have totally missed the--wait. isn't the problem that the law isn't clear?

If it was not Thursday, and HP wasn't winging its way to my doorstep, I would totally have my coffee out now.

Comments

[alicettlg.livejournal.com]

HP ... winging its way to my doorstep

There will be a lot of very tired UPS delivery people come Sunday...

[demilo19.livejournal.com]

What gets me is that people are asking some really good questions like "will a user be warned about a particular post or will the journal be automatically suspended?" And they don't have answers. Isn't that the point of a policy? To have a plan or procedure in place?

The law is far from clear - so should they be as clear as possible about their reaction?

....so trying to not think about this until after HP.

[claire.livejournal.com]

will a user be warned about a particular post or will the journal be automatically suspended?

Speaking only for myself as a user who happens to be on the Abuse Team rather than as a member of the Abuse Team, the answer is... It depends. It depends on the infringement, it depends on the user's intentions, it depends on the user's history. Usually we will ask for something to be removed within a timeframe, or we will suspend a journal until such time as the user agrees to remove it. Sometimes it's an outright suspend and don't do it again, sometimes it's an outright suspend and GTFO of LiveJournal. It really depends on the situation.

[seperis.livejournal.com]

*nods* That's the problem. I think it would help if we had a concrete standard, something in LJ that could be shown as a Miller Test case, so we would have something to work with in terms of figuring out if we wake up tomorrow, seperir or etc won't exist.

[demilo19.livejournal.com]

thank you. if that is made to clear to everyone, I think that might go a LONG way in quieting the fear that can run rampant. Right now, I think many people fear that LJ will take unilateral action and start permanently deleting accounts without an understanding of what is deemed permissible and what is not or a chance to correct journals to adhere to LJ standards.

But again, thank you for offering some clarity.

[deadlychameleon.livejournal.com]

Oh man. The UPS drivers are going to be a in a piss poor mood. I'm getting mine the old fashioned way.

Gee. LAWS NOT CLEAR? hmmm. Strange, that. Why didn't they just say that some things MAY NOT BE LEGAL DUE TO THESE LAWS and if they were found to be ILLEGAL then they would be taken down. I talk in caps a lot these days.

Also, LJ, get yourself
A. a good lawyer.
B. A good communications director.

[buggery.livejournal.com]

::long-overdue hugs::

Had to drop by to tell you how kick-ass your commentary has been over in lj_biz -- and here too, of course.

It's all such a classic example of sufficiently advanced fuckwaddery being indistinguishable from malice.

[akacat]

Isn't there a fairly simple loop-hole for most Smallville slash? The character portraying the "fifteen year old" was in his early 20s, and didn't in any way look like a teenager.

I have no idea if that applies to any of the other 'underage' fandoms.

[zelempa.livejournal.com]

Not Harry Potter! I think those actors are all still under 18, right?

And most slash is based on the BOOKS, so no actors there--I don't know if that makes it better or worse.