psa: suspended journals
i've seen a number of links; it looks like liz-marcs, femmequixotic, and ataniell93 have the latest information. eta: also lolaraincoat and catrinella.
1. an external group may be targetting fanfiction and roleplaying (among other things) on livejournal that mentions underaged sex. this may be the only thing bringing journals to livejournal's official attention; i have not seen any information on how this external group may be choosing what to report.
2. the trigger for journal suspension once a journal is reported may be having keywords in the journal's interest list related to any illegal activity. (having interest keywords may be considered advertising.) (you can see some of the problematic keywords listed in femmequixotic's and ataniell93's posts -- eta: a collection of suspension-related words is being collected here.)
3. livejournal's reaction to this is not what i had understood it to be previously: locking entries and moderating membership may not be enough to avoid suspension; removing the specific offending material may not lift suspension.
i'm keeping all of this in vague terms because #1 is hardly new and #2 is a new twist but not an entirely illogical one, but #3 is surprising to me, and i'm starting to doubt my understanding of livejournal's actions as an organization. i don't know if this constitutes a safe legal precedent for lj, although i've seen that questioned. i don't know if this is a reaction to a new legal situation for blogging services, although i've seen that mentioned. i don't know if lj abuse's inability to unsuspend journals in this matter is a new policy, an old policy that hadn't been in play before, or specific to this set of incidents. i'd like to find out, though.
eta: you know, i've never actually seen lj abuse have to handle charges of kiddie porn before (which is its own legal category in the united states). that may be what's behind the difference in approach -- i still wouldn't like it, but if that is the case, it could at least explain lj abuse's hands being tied....
eta: a formal apology from lj's ceo; a statement from lj's ceo that suspensions are now being reversed; a statement from lj's ceo that policies are being reviewed (which earns points in my eyes for mentioning the eff).
1. an external group may be targetting fanfiction and roleplaying (among other things) on livejournal that mentions underaged sex. this may be the only thing bringing journals to livejournal's official attention; i have not seen any information on how this external group may be choosing what to report.
2. the trigger for journal suspension once a journal is reported may be having keywords in the journal's interest list related to any illegal activity. (having interest keywords may be considered advertising.) (you can see some of the problematic keywords listed in femmequixotic's and ataniell93's posts -- eta: a collection of suspension-related words is being collected here.)
3. livejournal's reaction to this is not what i had understood it to be previously: locking entries and moderating membership may not be enough to avoid suspension; removing the specific offending material may not lift suspension.
i'm keeping all of this in vague terms because #1 is hardly new and #2 is a new twist but not an entirely illogical one, but #3 is surprising to me, and i'm starting to doubt my understanding of livejournal's actions as an organization. i don't know if this constitutes a safe legal precedent for lj, although i've seen that questioned. i don't know if this is a reaction to a new legal situation for blogging services, although i've seen that mentioned. i don't know if lj abuse's inability to unsuspend journals in this matter is a new policy, an old policy that hadn't been in play before, or specific to this set of incidents. i'd like to find out, though.
eta: you know, i've never actually seen lj abuse have to handle charges of kiddie porn before (which is its own legal category in the united states). that may be what's behind the difference in approach -- i still wouldn't like it, but if that is the case, it could at least explain lj abuse's hands being tied....
eta: a formal apology from lj's ceo; a statement from lj's ceo that suspensions are now being reversed; a statement from lj's ceo that policies are being reviewed (which earns points in my eyes for mentioning the eff).