One and only notice

[Maxie]

markland has been hiding his autism for over fifteen years producing horrible terrible games and investing all of the money in hair transplants... but a bald-faced liar he remains.....

 

[Tacgnol]

Whatever.

You know, Codex used to have a lawyer. Well, sort of unofficially. It was that one dude who I think got caught up in that whole GamerGate mess, but I can't remember his name.

I wonder if MLMarkland, esq., would mind taking his place. I mean you're probably a crappy lawyer despite your claim above, but us beggars can't be choosers.

Whaddya say there, ol' Marky Mark? Can we be your Funky Bunch?

It was that dude who got into a spat with self-proclaimed "video game lawyer" Ryan Morrison over Grimoiregate.

It ended with DU getting threatening communication.

https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads/another-day-another-codex-lawsuit.94393/

 

[ItsChon]

The problem is that so many people consider "free speech" to be some sort of higher value that must be preserved. Free speech isn't a value, it's a safeguard. It is a fact that some forms of speech/expression are not good and should outright be censored; this is referred to as obscenity in the American legal system. The issue is that differentiating between obscenity and regular free expression is not a scientific or objective process, and requires people to agree on a common set of values if a consensus is to be had. This obviously leaves a ton of room for the people that are responsible for making such judgements to abuse their power, and this has occurred throughout history countless times. When the idea of "free speech" was first solidified, it primarily referred to political speech because that was where the main form of censorship that people took issue with occurred. The 18th century American philosophers and thought leaders would have undoubtedly frowned upon and outright rejected many of the current types of speech that is considered to be lawful under the first amendment in the United States. Freedom of speech is not a perfect solution that we should hold up as a gold standard, but it is instead a necessary evil that we must continue to maintain so that we can stave off tyranny.

Now I didn't see the original post that prompted this entire mess. As far as I know the intent wasn't to post loli porn but it was instead something to do with images created or curated by an AI engine. If that was the case, I don't think said person should be banned, though said person should be instructed to censor future images and to just explain what was present if they're making some point. With that being said, shit like loli porn while not "technically" child pornography is so obviously not within the real bounds of "free speech", that I do not see any issue with banning users that post and propagate shit like this. Twig has helped me out several times with tech related issues and from what I've seen, has had a net positive impact on the Codex and is a quality member. This is a retarded hill to die on however, and he's clearly wrong here.

I understand the idea behind a slippery slope argument, but is anyone really going to argue that if we start banning the cartoon porn posters that will lead to the site eventually turning into ResetEra 2.0? Anyone who does claim something like this is either retarded or a disgusting animal, so there opinions can be confidently discarded. Delete all existing and future degenerate content that is posted, warn users who engage in such behavior once, and if they continue, ban them.

Hilarious thread though.

 

[Maxie]

The problem is that so many people consider "free speech" to be some sort of higher value that must be preserved. Free speech isn't a value, it's a safeguard. It is a fact that some forms of speech/expression are not good and should outright be censored; this is referred to as obscenity in the American legal system. The issue is that differentiating between obscenity and regular free expression is not a scientific or objective process, and requires people to agree on a common set of values if a consensus is to be had. This obviously leaves a ton of room for the people that are responsible for making such judgements to abuse their power, and this has occurred throughout history countless times. When the idea of "free speech" was first solidified, it primarily referred to political speech because that was where the main form of censorship that people took issue with occurred. The 18th century American philosophers and thought leaders would have undoubtedly frowned upon and outright rejected many of the current types of speech that is considered to be lawful under the first amendment in the United States. Freedom of speech is not a perfect solution that we should hold up as a gold standard, but it is instead a necessary evil that we must continue to maintain so that we can stave off tyranny.

Now I didn't see the original post that prompted this entire mess. As far as I know the intent wasn't to post loli porn but it was instead something to do with images created or curated by an AI engine. If that was the case, I don't think said person should be banned, though said person should be instructed to censor future images and to just explain what was present if they're making some point. With that being said, shit like loli porn while not "technically" child pornography is so obviously not within the real bounds of "free speech", that I do not see any issue with banning users that post and propagate shit like this. Twig has helped me out several times with tech related issues and from what I've seen, has had a net positive impact on the Codex and is a quality member. This is a retarded hill to die on however, and he's clearly wrong here.

I understand the idea behind a slippery slope argument, but is anyone really going to argue that if we start banning the cartoon porn posters that will lead to the site eventually turning into ResetEra 2.0? Anyone who does claim something like this is either retarded or a disgusting animal, so there opinions can be confidently discarded. Delete all existing and future degenerate content that is posted, warn users who engage in such behavior once, and if they continue, ban them.

Hilarious thread though.

four words or less

 

[Vic]

brevity is the soul of wit motherfucker

 

[Silverfish]

but is anyone really going to argue that if we start banning the cartoon porn posters that will lead to the site eventually turning into ResetEra 2.0?

Short term, no. Long term, yes.

 

[Non-Edgy Gamer]

Is it illegal? Call the police. Is it not illegal? Get a life.

The admin has made their decision on what to allow. If you don't like it, leave the site, don't start trying to dox or otherwise harass users.

I argued against the loli posters last year. No one wanted to ban them. But it turned out to be a self-solving problem, since most of the nutcases got themselves banned anyway.

There's no rule against you calling them out and shaming them. But leave it at that and be patient.

 

[puur prutswerk]

Let’s get back to Francis Ford Coppola covering up child rape and a child porn ring though, instead of twiglard’s midwit faux pas

My understanding of Hellywhat is that that is the norm and basically a requirement to work there 'successfully'. Same in D.C. or any other government. The devil is the god of this age and it shows. There is a reason Jesus told us to treat others like we wanted to be treated ourselves though, any treatment given out comes back to those who gave it out. Souls who give out more than they can take are done for.

The problem is that so many people consider "free speech" to be some sort of higher value that must be preserved. Free speech isn't a value, it's a safeguard. It is a fact that some forms of speech/expression are not good and should outright be censored; this is referred to as obscenity in the American legal system. The issue is that differentiating between obscenity and regular free expression is not a scientific or objective process, and requires people to agree on a common set of values if a consensus is to be had. This obviously leaves a ton of room for the people that are responsible for making such judgements to abuse their power, and this has occurred throughout history countless times. When the idea of "free speech" was first solidified, it primarily referred to political speech because that was where the main form of censorship that people took issue with occurred. The 18th century American philosophers and thought leaders would have undoubtedly frowned upon and outright rejected many of the current types of speech that is considered to be lawful under the first amendment in the United States. Freedom of speech is not a perfect solution that we should hold up as a gold standard, but it is instead a necessary evil that we must continue to maintain so that we can stave off tyranny.

Now I didn't see the original post that prompted this entire mess. As far as I know the intent wasn't to post loli porn but it was instead something to do with images created or curated by an AI engine. If that was the case, I don't think said person should be banned, though said person should be instructed to censor future images and to just explain what was present if they're making some point. With that being said, shit like loli porn while not "technically" child pornography is so obviously not within the real bounds of "free speech", that I do not see any issue with banning users that post and propagate shit like this. Twig has helped me out several times with tech related issues and from what I've seen, has had a net positive impact on the Codex and is a quality member. This is a retarded hill to die on however, and he's clearly wrong here.

I understand the idea behind a slippery slope argument, but is anyone really going to argue that if we start banning the cartoon porn posters that will lead to the site eventually turning into ResetEra 2.0? Anyone who does claim something like this is either retarded or a disgusting animal, so there opinions can be confidently discarded. Delete all existing and future degenerate content that is posted, warn users who engage in such behavior once, and if they continue, ban them.

Hilarious thread though.

four words or less

Free speech hurts sometimes.

 

[Immortal]

Is it illegal? Call the police. Is it not illegal? Get a life.

Do you really think reporting RPGCodex to local authorities should be the first step?
Website providers should have a chance to clean up their site especially when they can't control what people post.

Codex has removed this content before in the past - begrudgingly since some staff seem to love it so much.

 

[gaussgunner]

shit like loli porn while not "technically" child pornography is so obviously not within the real bounds of "free speech", that I do not see any issue with banning users that post and propagate shit like this.

It's also well beyond the bounds of *RPG* Codex. I don't EVER want to see anything resembling CP on here. If in doubt, nuke it.

Twig has helped me out several times with tech related issues and from what I've seen, has had a net positive impact on the Codex and is a quality member. This is a retarded hill to die on however, and he's clearly wrong here.

Did he really intend to post loli? It was a screenshot of thumbnails of anime girls. You wouldn't notice unless you looked closely or someone pointed out that one thumbnail was loli MAYBE. I don't think anyone should be banned for accidentally posting something like that, just delete it or blur out that bit. If a user repeatedly posts borderline loli shit, that's a different matter.

 

[Fedora Master]

Much like with the chans, by tacitly allowing "edgy" shit you eventually attract a gaggle of idiots who are actually into it. Feet, gore, loli etc
You left the door open and now the rats moved in

 

[Roguey]

Much like with the chans, by tacitly allowing "edgy" shit you eventually attract a gaggle of idiots who are actually into it. Feet, gore, loli etc
You left the door open and now the rats moved in

Awfully peculiar how you associate being attracted to a particular part of the female anatomy with being edgy.

 

[Taka-Haradin puolipeikko]

Much like with the chans, by tacitly allowing "edgy" shit you eventually attract a gaggle of idiots who are actually into it. Feet, gore, loli etc
You left the door open and now the rats moved in

Awfully peculiar how you associate being attracted to a particular part of the female anatomy with being edgy.

Menstruation stuff is kinda niche.

 

[Roguey]

Menstruation stuff is kinda niche.

That's stuff they produce, not a part of their body. Body waste is always gross, sure.

 

[Taka-Haradin puolipeikko]

Menstruation stuff is kinda niche.

That's stuff they produce, not a part of their body. Body waste is always gross, sure.

My joke.
Ruined.

 

[Fedora Master]

Much like with the chans, by tacitly allowing "edgy" shit you eventually attract a gaggle of idiots who are actually into it. Feet, gore, loli etc
You left the door open and now the rats moved in

Awfully peculiar how you associate being attracted to a particular part of the female anatomy with being edgy.

Since I know you're a soulless flesh automaton let me elaborate: Certain things get spammed because it annoys people. Eventually it becomes so common people actually take it for granted. That's the wedge in the door for the degenerates who actually enjoy it. Doesn't matter what it is, feet, lolicon, furry shit or Infinitrons news.

 

[tommy heavenly6]

Awfully peculiar how you associate being attracted to a particular part of the female anatomy with being edgy.

 

[Bester]

Frankly, I'm very afraid of him and I am extremely intimidated by his history of legal victories.

Eat some red meat, man.

 

[MLMarkland]

I would provide informal business legal advice from the point of view of a business executive for free.

Advice #1: Ban LolI/anime/anything borderline because if it’s not already illegal it will be illegal in the US within 2-3 years. The advent of generative Ai automatically changed the meaning of the language of “indistinguishable to an ordinary person” in CIPA.

 

[Vic]

I would provide informal business legal advice from the point of view of a business executive for free.

Advice #1: Ban LolI/anime/anything borderline because if it’s not already illegal it will be illegal in the US within 2-3 years. The advent of generative Ai automatically changed the meaning of the language of “indistinguishable to an ordinary person” in CIPA.

fuck US

and fuck you

 

[Non-Edgy Gamer]

The advent of generative Ai automatically changed the meaning of the language of “indistinguishable to an ordinary person” in CIPA.

Again, I agree with you that site policy should be not to post it, or at least not to post it outside of GD.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/definit...SC-146950522-970531512&term_occur=1&term_src=

(11) the term “indistinguishable” used with respect to a depiction, means virtually indistinguishable, in that the depiction is such that an ordinary person viewing the depiction would conclude that the depiction is of an actual minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. This definition does not apply to depictions that are drawings, cartoons, sculptures, or paintings depicting minors or adults.

But if this image (the image the OP in that thread was freaking out about) is "indistinguishable" from an "actual minor" to you, you need to get your eyes checked.

 

[MLMarkland]

The advent of generative Ai automatically changed the meaning of the language of “indistinguishable to an ordinary person” in CIPA.

Again, I agree with you that site policy should be not to post it, or at least not to post it outside of GD.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/definit...SC-146950522-970531512&term_occur=1&term_src=

(11) the term “indistinguishable” used with respect to a depiction, means virtually indistinguishable, in that the depiction is such that an ordinary person viewing the depiction would conclude that the depiction is of an actual minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. This definition does not apply to depictions that are drawings, cartoons, sculptures, or paintings depicting minors or adults.

But if this image (the image the OP in that thread was freaking out about) is "indistinguishable" from an "actual minor" to you, you need to get your eyes checked.

I’m bored but here goes:

1) Ai generates a specific and indistinguishable from a minor piece of CP and then runs a cel-shader over it — is this CP?

2) The word “actual” in CIPA references whether an ordinary person would believe the image depicted an “actual minor” in the sense that the subject in the image is “indistinguishable from a minor” regardless of representational style — in the law it is explicit that a specific identification of unique minor is not required. Actual means “perceived to be indistinguishable from actual by an ordinary person.”

Based on both 1 & 2, the advent of Ai means that an ordinary person cannot distinguish between any of the things under discussion, and as such, the mere invention of Ai and its deployment to public, changed the meaning of CIPA since the meaning is inherently subjective.

 

[Vic]

we are talking about cartoons for god's sake

 

[Skinwalker]

I would provide informal business legal advice from the point of view of a business executive for free.

Advice #1: Ban LolI/anime/anything borderline because if it’s not already illegal it will be illegal in the US within 2-3 years. The advent of generative Ai automatically changed the meaning of the language of “indistinguishable to an ordinary person” in CIPA.

Yes, all loli userpics should be deleted from the gallery. Replace them with the most withered old man you can find in all of anime.

 

[Non-Edgy Gamer]

1) Ai generates a specific and indistinguishable from a minor piece of CP and then runs a cel-shader over it — is this CP?

Ok, well, none of this is legal advice of any kind (obviously), and I recommend anyone seeking real legal advice hire an attorney and not just listen to some asshole on the internet with an Avernum profile pic. That said...

That scenario you gave is art that's created from an image of a real minor.

Generative AI art is trained off a large database of images. Some of those images may be of minors, but here's the important part: those images DO NOT EXIST inside the model. The model has merely learned what a child is. And probably poorly at that.

It's the difference between an artist knowing how to draw a child in general, and an artist taking a real image of a real child and then tracing it.

E.g., would you try to put a Renaissance artist in prison for drawing a cherub? No? Same thing, just will an alien-headed vampire animu girl.

2) The word “actual” in CIPA references whether an ordinary person would believe the image depicted an “actual minor” in the sense that the subject in the image is “indistinguishable from a minor” regardless of representational style — in the law it is explicit that a specific identification of unique minor is not required. Actual means “perceived to be indistinguishable from actual by an ordinary person.”

Yes, "actual". As in "real". Which this is clearly not.

Again, would you mistake that image of a 3-fingered loli showing off a snatch that consists of one line down her crotch for a real child engaging in a sexual act?

If someone drew a line on a Barbie doll pelvis and told you it was a 13yo girl, would you try to get them prosecuted for child porn?

Based on both 1 & 2, the advent of Ai means that an ordinary person cannot distinguish between any of the things under discussion, and as such, the mere invention of Ai and its deployment to public, changed the meaning of CIPA since the meaning is inherently subjective.

It was always subjective to some degree. IIRC, some states have thrown guys in prison for text based on on obscenity laws, which are even more subjective. And they did the same to Max Hardcore, who just made porn with 18+ whores who said things like "daddy", but were clearly adults. (What prosecutor did that guy piss off btw?)

Photoshop has existed for 3 decades now, and hyperrealist art has existed for longer. The idea that some bad hands image generator changes what people can and can't distinguish is an exaggeration at the very least.

If you make something that looks like a real photo of a real child, whether you do it by hand or with a computer, then you have a problem. If you made a computer generated image based on a photo of a real child, then you have a problem.

Until you do though, someone is probably going to have to change the law or ignore precedent in order to prosecute someone for it. (Which, hey, they may well do these days.)