A Question....

[libgirl.livejournal.com]

Has there been any consideration about age restrictions at the suggested archive?

As a long-time, multi-fandom participant and talking with another one this week over the issue at LJ and with fanlib, two things came up:

1. As long as we're paying someone else to host our things, they can decide not to host specific things. Also, people will attempt to make a profit off of us in any way possible. The best solution is to host our own site with a dedicated server than can house us all.

2. We were talking and we both agreed that if there was a multi-fandom fanfiction hub, we wouldn't want it to be along the lines of ff.net. Everyone I know cringes when a news source goes to ff.net to talk about the "fandom phenomenon". That said, admitting fic.'s based on quality is tricky and subjective. If we create something, for ourselves, then I hope that we would both cover ourselves legally and present ourselves professionally. There is a legal issue involving minors and NC-17 material than can only really be remedied by not allowing minors. The easiest solution seems to be creating a panfandom archive for underage readers either in association with or as part of the larger archive, requiring a age statement to sign up and logged-in-only access to adult material. Also, if there are no underage readers allowed, then there is less likelihood of creating another ff.net.

I know that this will probably not be a popular opinion. I know that many people in fandom, particularly on LJ are underage and "passing" or "socking" in order to read adult material. I'm not saying that some underage readers cannot handle adult material or aren't already participating in adult activities; however, from a legal standpoint, it seems more responsible to take precautions.

Additionally, in light of the recent LJ events, it's obvious that much of what gets archives, websites, journals and fic.'s shut down is a perceived danger to the "childrenz". If this is a site by adults, for adults it's less likely to come under that sort of negative fire. After all, we're going to have to deal with the legal ramifications of intellectual property and copyright laws already.

I'm truly not trying to rock the boat or ignore the many and important contributions of underage fans to fandom. I'm just trying to ascertain how the issues of liability will be dealt with.

Comments

[labellementeuse.livejournal.com]

IIRC this was discussed in the original post in astolat's journal and thought was leaning towards having a theoretical but not actual system of age-restricted material - where everything is hosted on one archive but if you're not logged in you have to click a button saying you're over 18 and if you are logged in you have to be over 18 - or say you're over 18 - to see R18(NC-17) material.

My thoughts on this are pretty mixed since I've been reading "adult" material for many years, since well before I was technically of age to do so, and I don't and never did feel particularly disturbed. (Although I'm aware that the notion disturbs some authors...!) OTOH, I understand the desire by people running things to cover their asses. The only thing I do feel strongly is that under-18s should not be ghetto-ized away. And I wonder what the response is to under-18s writing the porn...!

Additionally, in light of the recent LJ events, it's obvious that much of what gets archives, websites, journals and fic.'s shut down is a perceived danger to the "childrenz".

Yeah, but on an indirect harm principle - that something about the content will lead to children being harmed - as opposed to a direct harm principle where children are actually harmed by the existence of porn/the reading of porn. the latest kerfuckle - as I understand it, and comments on CNet aside - was that the interests function allowed paedophiles to network. Not that anything paedophiles were doing on LJ was harmful to children. the veracity of this is obviously debatable but I do think that was the underlying principle there.

[kyuuketsukirui.livejournal.com]

where everything is hosted on one archive but if you're not logged in you have to click a button saying you're over 18 and if you are logged in you have to be over 18 - or say you're over 18 - to see R18(NC-17) material.

Yeah. If there were any sort of age restriction, it shouldn't be anything more than that. Most people are not going to be keen for a new archive if they can only post their adult fic locked to members only, and a lot of people will refuse to link, rec, etc. fic that's locked or passworded in any way, so it's just a bad situation all around, especially when there are plenty of other archives that don't make you jump through hoops (a new archive is going to attract people by offering more options, not fewer!).

[eridanusus.livejournal.com]

I know that's what FictionAlley does, or at least they did last time I went there - which was admittedly a while ago. I'm pretty sure they also skim over new fic being posted to make sure it's not riddled with typoes.

[libgirl.livejournal.com]

Both of which seem reasonable to me. :)

Quality control & Locking adult content

[chinawolf.livejournal.com]

Believe me, it is not reasonable to skim for quality. It is an unimaginable amount of work to screen fics, even if you have a group of dedicated volunteers. I used to work for FA, and if I imagine the scope of this archive we are planning correctly, it will dwarf even the current, gigantic FA. Unless the new archive would literally have a hundred volunteers working at least half an hour every day, a screening process is probably just not feasible. I honestly wish it was, believe me, but unless every fic author suddenly learns how to spell, I doubt it is.

The other argument against screening for spelling is that it will drive away lots of fen because it will increase the risk of coming off as elitist, which is - as I understood it - precisely what we want to avoid since this is supposed to be an all-inclusive archive.

Regarding the locking of content, a small correction: FA doesn't have NC-17 fics, they have the above mentioned system in place for fics with an R-rating. I agree this is a great system because it is easy to click through. But as far as I remember, this would, for example, not satisfy the lawyers that sent the C&D's on Warner Brothers' and Bloomsbury's behalf. You have to have an actual password barrier (ex. see Restricted Section (http://www.restrictedsection.org/)) to cover that legal angle. If the new archive wants to go the legal safe road, a log-in system is probaly the only way to do it.

[labellementeuse.livejournal.com]

Absolutely. And it's not like Livejournal has any system like that - most people don't even do the "hey, if you're a minor, don't read this!" thing at the top of their fic posts. (Ironically, pornish_pixies did require members to be over 18, and checked, I believe.) Every hoop you have to jump through decreases the likelihood of this being a really useful inclusive project.

[libgirl.livejournal.com]

I wasn't trying to suggest that we make getting to fic. a process that is overly difficult or complicated. I was just curious how we were going to address the issues of age-appropriate/restricted material.

I don't want an archive that is bulky and user-unfriendly anymore than anyone else does. I was just curious.

[labellementeuse.livejournal.com]

Yeah, no worries, I was pretty much expanding on what was being discussed as possible solutions that wouldn't be appropriate - not trying to put words in your mouth.

[lily-liedtome.livejournal.com]

I agree with you one this - I think any more rigid form risks alienating our potential audience. I know I would probably be wary of reccing to it if any kind of login was required - honestly, for the first four years of my fannish existence I would never have even looked past the first page of a 'members only' site; it sends a very cliquish message (although that is most likely not the intent).

Also, I think it is important to keep in mind that the age of consent/majority varies all over the world, and to word any material concerning this accordingly (although if it is hosted on us servers, does that mean that all incoming traffic falls under us laws? That doesn't seem right, but internet laws are weird...)

[libgirl.livejournal.com]

I personally am wary of login required sites myself. I was just wondering what the alternatives that were being considered were.

I think doing something along the lines of fiction alley would be fine--I just didn't know what was being considered.

US laws?

[bloodrebel333.livejournal.com]

I was thinking about that too, a few days ago - if that's the case, we could also see where it'd be easiest to host our site without getting people on our backs, and host it from that country. I'm in the Netherlands, and I think (I'm not a lawyer) that we have more flexible laws re: these kinds of things.

Something to consider!

Re: US laws?

[ellie-nor.livejournal.com]

That's a great idea! ::thumbs up::

[itrasbiel.livejournal.com]

I was going to mention, most of the fiction/art sites I know of that have any sort of content-lock on adult content have a simple logged-in + over-18 check on the content, and it seems like that's often enough. Any sort of opt-in adult content check would be fair enough, because all you need to do is log in/get an account and assert that you're over 18.

I like the idea of having a one-time "yeah I don't have an account but I'm over 18, I swear" button for the anonymous, too, because it cuts down on so much hassle, seriously.

[kyuuketsukirui.livejournal.com]

Well, the point of an archive is to get a wider audience, and you're not going to get that if your only pool is members. For one thing, the majority of readers will not bother to get accounts unless they are writers as well.

[itrasbiel.livejournal.com]

Right. Hence my support of a "I'm over 18" button for non-members. But I don't see that feature on a lot of archive sites (although it is more prevalent on fanfiction sites than on, like, general art sites, and that probably has something to do with the amount of outsider attention the site pulls), and I don't know if that's a perceived legal concern or the coders not writing the feature up, or what. Most of the archive sites I hang around do have a member-specific opt-in for adult content, though.

In a perfect world, I'd probably prefer the format AFFN uses over anything else-- a warning on the splash page, and past that no warnings or barriers. But since a lot of the discussion is about finding a legally defensible position, I was just throwing out some ways I had seen other sites handle adult content.

(and, actually, I know there are a whole lot of empty accounts on both AFFN and y!gallery, from readers/watchers signing up to see the porn or comment/review, but I do agree that when faced with a "you need an account to do X" most users won't sign up just to get the basic ability to view content on the site.)

[libgirl.livejournal.com]

IIRC this was discussed in the original post in astolat's journal and thought was leaning towards having a theoretical but not actual system of age-restricted material

I must have missed that; I'll go look for it, thank you. The proposed 'theoretical' system would work and is essentially one of the option I foresaw.

My thoughts on this are also mixed. I didn't really get into fandom much before I was 18 and in my first fandom, I wasn't really interested in adult material so it was non-issue. However, my friend, who's been in fandom for almost 15 years was definitely underage when she got involved. I don't know what the answer is. The library isn't going to restrict books to children based on their perceived appropriateness for the age; they expect the parents to do that.

Unfortunately, for some reason, parents seem to think that they aren't responsible for what their children see online, the website is. It's an unfair double standard, but it's one we have to deal with.

And I wonder what the response is to under-18s writing the porn...!
I considered this, but I have no idea as to the answer. You can't stop underage people writing things based on age-appropriateness, but if you let them post them and don't let them read it seems hypocritical; I know. Search me on how to deal with it.

Yeah, but on an indirect harm principle - that something about the content will lead to children being harmed - as opposed to a direct harm principle where children are actually harmed by the existence of porn/the reading of porn.

I agree in relation to this latest issue, but I do think that a group of "concerned parentz" could hit an archive based on the "providing pornography to minors" principle. Which could and almost certainly would shut down an archive. That's why I wanted to know what was being considered.

he only thing I do feel strongly is that under-18s should not be ghetto-ized away. I agree as well. No one wants to be someone's ugly step-child and I wouldn't want to make underage fen feel that way. I don't know what the answer is, but I hope it's one that is respectful and safe for everyone.

I'm really not truly to be a big bad bully, I'm just trying to see what the consensus is and what we're considering.

[labellementeuse.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately, for some reason, parents seem to think that they aren't responsible for what their children see online, the website is.

Which is kind of tragic considering that, barring requiring a credit card number to join an archive/site/whatever, websites are actually completely unable to truly restrict content. Anyone can lie in a profile, administrators don't know. Parents are the ones who have to check. (Of course you need smart parents... my father checked my history one time. I started clearing the cache after that.) I mean, smart parents just should not rely on that.

I do think that a group of "concerned parentz" could hit an archive based on the "providing pornography to minors" principle.

Yeah. That's a concern. I mean, IANAL so I don't know much about the technical defintions of pornography - I know that academically the difference between pornography and erotic fiction is generally about to what extent the work is demeaning. Unfortunately that's a degree of sensitivity I don't think anyone really applies in these situations. So.

I'm really not truly to be a big bad bully, I'm just trying to see what the consensus is and what we're considering.

Yeah, I got that from your post :) don't worry. It's a valid concern.

[libgirl.livejournal.com]

Which is kind of tragic considering that, barring requiring a credit card number to join an archive/site/whatever, websites are actually completely unable to truly restrict content.

I agree. It seems to me that responsible web parenting is very different from responsible RL parenting and some people that are good at the latter are not good at the former. I don't know the solution for them is, but the common response seems to be to shift the blame onto the site itself. (And sadly IP's seem to react by shutting down the site--which none of us want.)

I mean, IANAL so I don't know much about the technical defintions of pornography - I know that academically the difference between pornography and erotic fiction is generally about to what extent the work is demeaning. Unfortunately that's a degree of sensitivity I don't think anyone really applies in these situations.

I agree with you here for the most part. I don't know what standards would/could be used, but I think it would be best not to have to find out. :/

Yeah, I got that from your post :) don't worry. It's a valid concern.
Thanks.

[bloodrebel333.livejournal.com]

barring requiring a credit card number to join an archive/site/whatever

Very bad idea, since in most of the world (except the US) the majority of people don't even use credit cards! That is, here in Europe they don't - only businessmen usually have them.

That's one of those things that keeps annoying me - I can hardly buy anything online because everything's based on the credit card system, which is normal for Americans, but weird and uncomfortable for us here.

[red-eft.livejournal.com]

My thoughts on this are pretty mixed since I've been reading "adult" material for many years, since well before I was technically of age to do so, and I don't and never did feel particularly disturbed.

Hell, far from being disturbed, I think being exposed to fandom from the age of twelve probably saved me from all sorts of self-hatred by providing me with somewhere where sex and gay people weren't seen as, you know. Evil. Which is probably not an argument that'll get us anywhere with the "protect the children!" folk, but it does make me feel rather strongly about letting the underagers have access, even if it's just the "don't ask, don't tell" method that underage fans have been using for years.

[labellementeuse.livejournal.com]

I think being exposed to fandom from the age of twelve probably saved me from all sorts of self-hatred... it does make me feel rather strongly about letting the underagers have access, even if it's just the "don't ask, don't tell" method that underage fans have been using for years.

Yeah, this was a factor for me too. And I really think that fandom contributes to the sexual revolution in that sense, a real awareness of sexuality as a spectrum rather than as absolutes. Fandom is good for kids! I mean, ideally I would like fandom en masse to be able to say, look, the sexuality of under-18s as it pertains to fanfic is none of our business and people that are ready for it will find it and people that aren't will avoid it - which is my opinion based on observing the younger family members I have who read fanfiction as well as my own experiences. But I recognise that this is just not a perspective that everyone would find acceptable, even within fandom, and the non-fannish would be asking me where my Earth logic was, so. *shrug* People have to cover their asses.

[libgirl.livejournal.com]

And I really think that fandom contributes to the sexual revolution in that sense, a real awareness of sexuality as a spectrum rather than as absolutes.

Agreed :D.

But I recognise that this is just not a perspective that everyone would find acceptable, even within fandom, and the non-fannish would be asking me where my Earth logic was, so. *shrug* People have to cover their asses.

As always, sadly, the world we imagine isn't the one we live in :(. I agree that sexuality isn't something you magically wake up with when you turn 18, it's something that is part of who you are, in my opinion, from birth. It's a bit ludicrous to say you can't have or be aware of your sexuality until you're an adult, but for some reason, that's how we act. :/

[tejas.livejournal.com]

I think providing a simple "Yes, I am of age to read this in my country" in the user profile should be all the due diligence the archive requires. That flag would then open any fics rated over the appropriate level without continuous click-throughs. For users who don't want to have a profile (and there will be many - people can be very paranoid about such things), then they'd have to click the same age statement before they could open a "restricted" fic.

As a parent, I get very irritated by other people trying to restrict what my child can access. That's my job, thank you very much. This is something I could easily help her work around, should the need arise. It would, I'd think, also absolve the archive of liability.

[libgirl.livejournal.com]

I like that idea--an easy way for people with profiles to avoid dealing with age statements and for those who don't wish to get a profile--some sort of splash page with an age disclaimer.

[tejas.livejournal.com]

And no specific age listed, either, since it's different depending on local laws. If we're going to trust people to tell the truth about their ages, we should be able to trust them to know what the age of consent is.

One think I *don't* think should happen would be a separate archive. Separate is never equal and it would needlessly complicate matters.