Orin S. Kerr from George Washington University - Law School writes:
...Criminal law is a blunt instrument that should be used only as a last resort. The state's power to deny individuals their freedom is an extraordinary power, and it should be reserved for harms that other mechanisms cannot remedy. Online virtual worlds may seem real to some users, but unlike real life, they are mediated by game administrators who can take action with consequences internal to the game. Internal virtual harms should trigger internal virtual remedies. It is only when harms go outside the game that the criminal law should be potentially available to remedy wrongs not redressable elsewhere.
You can download the entire paper here
3 comments:
Although this sounds very pious and intellectual, I think there may be a fallacy in it. What actual virtual harms actually do NOT have outside consequences. I would argue that the answer is there are very few virtual harms that do not have outside consequences.
Let's consider the case of a "virtual rape." Mr. Kerr would have us believe that a virtual rape should trigger internal virtual remedies. Now be serious! He is actually saying that someone guilty of rape should have their avatar locked in a virtual jail or suffer some other virtual penalty? This only serves to minimalize the offense.
Dennis, I can see where you are coming from, however, I feel that physical rape and virtual rape are two entirely different things that entail entirely different consequences.
Physical rape involves forced sexual acts, violence, and possible long term mental damage. How detrimental could a "virtual" rape be to a man or a woman? In fact, it could be stopped at any time by a push of the on/off switch and thus...its level of severity is EXTREMELY questionable.
Before we point and laugh at putting avatars in virtual prisons...think of what you are doing, in all, by making your very own avatar and flying around virtual landscapes. THE WHOLE THING IS LIGHTHEARTED! While there are legitimate uses for SL...student avatars continue to stroll around Gator Nation Island dressed as the kool aid man, wearing wings, etc.
For the majority of users, what happens in the virtual world will not affect life in the real world. To send people to court for virtual crimes would be to make a mockery of an already flawed justice system.
I agree. I do believe that bringing in the law to punish people for virtual crimes is a bit excessive. However, downloading copywritten material is "virtual stealing", which is a federal offense. So, I do agree with Dennis that there are few virtual crimes that do not have real-world consequences.
Now, in my opinion, Linden Lab (or the provider of the sim servers in question) are the only ones with any authority to enforce some sort of "law" within their environments. I think that, as Second Life grows, they'll need to consider creating a "terms of services" enforcement police solely dedicated to enforcing the terms of service and handling any sort of violations to that. I use the "terms of services" here as they seem to be the only law available in Second Life.
Ideally, though, laws should be written by and for The People (in this case, Second Life residents). Maybe Linden Lab can have some sort of survey to determine what these laws are.
Now, can virtual punishment truly reform user behavior? It all depends on how immersed a user feels with his environment, regardless of whether it is virtual or real. It just so happens that we all feel immersed with the real world and as such, being punished works on most of us. Yet, there are people like Charles Manson, who are very disconnected from reality, that no amount of incarceration can (or has) changed them.
Maybe a "virtual jail" cannot rehabilitate someone. But, at the very least, it'll stop them from committing more crimes in that environment.
Post a Comment