![[info]](https://www.insanejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
![[info]](https://www.insanejournal.com/img/community.gif){kind=small}
reality check?
ETA: Please read the comments to this post (and here)! Many commenters have pointed out that mskala (Matthew Skala), the author of the second article linked below, is wrong on U.S. law, and this casts much of his article into question.
There are many reasons (also acknowledged by M. Skala, incidentally) to be very displeased with Six Apart and LiveJournal *completely aside* from the question of legality/illegality in fandom pursuits.
I linked to the article because I think it's worth discussing ~ and in fact the discussion here has been very educational and enlightening. I'm very grateful so many knowledgeable folks are participating and pointing out the flaws in the arguments presented. [/end ETA]
And now for some points that may have been overlooked:
Synecdochic posts on why LJ is the best place for fandom to be.
And
A refreshing (and frightening) dose of perspective:
The Terrible Secret of LiveJournal.
I strongly encourage you to read the entire article. I wanted to include more quotes, but it got far too long, as I wanted to copy over almost everything. The writer explains just how 6A/LJ has been supportive (and continues to support) fandom in spite of strong reasons not to, but also explains what 6A/LJ have done wrong that led him to leave the service himself.
He also points out that 6A/LJ caused their own problems when it comes to the proanorexia community flap:
It's taking me far too long to post this as I keep wanting to add more and more quotes. Just go and read.
Scarily enough, I learned (where have I been?!) that there's a strong fundie-backed movement to completely do away with social networking sites, period. And all they need is the right ammunition.
Oy.
There are many reasons (also acknowledged by M. Skala, incidentally) to be very displeased with Six Apart and LiveJournal *completely aside* from the question of legality/illegality in fandom pursuits.
I linked to the article because I think it's worth discussing ~ and in fact the discussion here has been very educational and enlightening. I'm very grateful so many knowledgeable folks are participating and pointing out the flaws in the arguments presented. [/end ETA]
And now for some points that may have been overlooked:
Synecdochic posts on why LJ is the best place for fandom to be.
And
A refreshing (and frightening) dose of perspective:
The Terrible Secret of LiveJournal.
"[...] A lot of material, even in what fandom thinks of as its mainstream - including material that you like to read and look at - is illegal. That's the terrible secret of Livejournal.
In light of this terrible secret, and in light of the imperfect world in which it's all happening, Six Apart's actions actually make a whole lot of sense and aren't nearly so evil as fandom people are saying. [...]"
I strongly encourage you to read the entire article. I wanted to include more quotes, but it got far too long, as I wanted to copy over almost everything. The writer explains just how 6A/LJ has been supportive (and continues to support) fandom in spite of strong reasons not to, but also explains what 6A/LJ have done wrong that led him to leave the service himself.
He also points out that 6A/LJ caused their own problems when it comes to the proanorexia community flap:
"Six Apart has been very stupid in presenting a defence of pro-anorexia as being okay, instead of saying that it's legal and that's the end of the issue. By even considering the question of whether pro-anorexia is okay in a moral or social-responsibility sense, they (first) invite argument on that point, which they will inevitably lose; and (second) allow people to think that illegal fandom material could be tolerated if it were argued to be okay in a moral and social-responsibility sense. Six Apart should be directing attention to the law, saying that they'll follow the law and no other standard, and they should be refusing to engage in debate on the morality and social responsibility of hosting any given content."
It's taking me far too long to post this as I keep wanting to add more and more quotes. Just go and read.
Scarily enough, I learned (where have I been?!) that there's a strong fundie-backed movement to completely do away with social networking sites, period. And all they need is the right ammunition.
Oy.
It was not an issue of child pornography, but of obscenity, since obsenity was the reason cited for deletion of the two journals, so child porn is irrelevent.
It was not an issue of fanart because they didn't cite copyright violation as the reason for deletion.
The reason was obscenity. There is an obscenity issue which bothers me because that does smack of censorship.
There was also the issue of banning without warning, which bothered me. And an issue of banning a permanent account and then stating that they were not going to return the funds, or the funds of anyone whose account might have been banned. If someone pays you to provide a service and then you refuse to provide it, as a business you have an obligation to return the payment.
Now, whether or not it is wise to call attention to the issue due to the pornography/copyright infringement, that's another matter.
(Oh, and I have nothing in my journal that could even be vaguely considered to be child pornography and my most scandalous work is all orginal writing which, while I wouldn't particularly want my mother reading it, isn't any worse than material that can be found openly on the shelves at Barnes and Noble.)
Those are some of the reasons the writer of the second article cited for his own choice to leave LiveJournal. In spite of his hectoring fandom on the illegality of their actions, he isn't enamored of LJ's customer service at all.