TOS question for Mods

TOS question for Mods (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

Bhruic -> TOS question for Mods (12/28/2014 11:44:13 AM)
A question for the Mods, or any other knowledgeable person... It seems to me that in the Terms of Service, the articles 6.3 and 7.3.13 are in conflict with each other. Can anyone clarify that? The only thing I can think of is, perhaps, some very specific definition of the word "obscene". For reference: 6.3. You acknowledge and understand that some of the Materials contain graphic visual depictions of sexual activity and nudity, graphic audio portions of the same kind of content, and descriptions of sexually oriented and sexually explicit activities. You acknowledge that You are aware of the nature of the Materials provided by Our Website and that You are not offended by such Materials, and to the contrary, that You are accessing this Website specifically because You enjoy such expressive content and You wish to view such Materials. You stipulate that you access this Website freely, voluntarily, and willingly, and for Your own personal enjoyment. 7.3.13. You agree that You will not use Our services in order to view, transmit, traffic in, or in any other way interact with, provide to any other person, or receive obscene materials in any way;

ReinRaus -> RE: TOS question for Mods (12/28/2014 1:14:11 PM)
The wording is vague and generic in the latter article. I assume the use of "obscene" there to imply anything illegally obscene (e.g., child pornography). I suppose it's not necessary to hash that out in the TOS since it's already against the law.

LiveSpark -> RE: TOS question for Mods (12/28/2014 1:25:05 PM)
I've been thinking about this and I agree, these articles of the TOS are vague and seemingly contradictory. Hopefully one of the Mods will come along and either clarify or find out and let us know. Meantime, judging by the pictures I've seen, those parts of the TOS don't seem to be enforced. I get that there are too many members to keep track of every picture that is downloaded but in the part of our profiles where a picture can be downloaded there IS mention that "genital focus pictures may be removed" so presumably a) there is something about this that isn't allowed and b) they have a way of keeping track, unless they are relying on people to report these pictures.

ReinRaus -> RE: TOS question for Mods (12/28/2014 1:36:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LiveSpark [...] so presumably a) there is something about this that isn't allowed and b) they have a way of keeping track, unless they are relying on people to report these pictures. Whenever I've gone to report someone's default photo of their genitals or bent over ass I believe there's a message that states reports are not manually checked. I think the only way it would work is if enough people flagged the same photo to have it trigger automatic deletion, which in a way relies on members instead of putting some of the work in the hands of non-forum mods. Maybe they reserve the man/woman power for reviewing reports of illegal activity rather than minor offenses to our eyeballs.

ExiledTyrant -> RE: TOS question for Mods (12/28/2014 1:36:41 PM)
Ambiguity and contradiction allows the site to separate from users. This is a world wide site and laws vary from state to state, territory to territory, and country to country. Some things are legal some things are not, it is in the best interest of the site (the owner in particular) to neither condone nor condemn what is being done here so he can maintain legal separation. Jus sayin

LiveSpark -> RE: TOS question for Mods (12/28/2014 1:45:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ReinRaus quote: ORIGINAL: LiveSpark [...] so presumably a) there is something about this that isn't allowed and b) they have a way of keeping track, unless they are relying on people to report these pictures. Whenever I've gone to report someone's default photo of their genitals or bent over ass I believe there's a message that states reports are not manually checked. I think the only way it would work is if enough people flagged the same photo to have it trigger automatic deletion, which in a way relies on members instead of putting some of the work in the hands of non-forum mods. Maybe they reserve the man/woman power for reviewing reports of illegal activity rather than minor offenses to our eyeballs. You know what you're right. I remember that from times I've reported pictures. That must indeed be the way they do it.

KYsissy -> RE: TOS question for Mods (12/28/2014 1:56:58 PM)
File it under a CYA

stef -> RE: TOS question for Mods (12/28/2014 2:08:54 PM)
File it under WGAS.

domincalifornia -> RE: TOS question for Mods (12/28/2014 2:48:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bhruic It seems to me that in the Terms of Service, the articles 6.3 and 7.3.13 are in conflict with each other. Can anyone clarify that? The only thing I can think of is, perhaps, some very specific definition of the word "obscene". "Obscene" is a legal term. Many countries have laws against "obscene" material, but the definition of what constitutes obscene varies from country to country. Basically, all the two points you site say is: 1. I understand that this sites contains sexually explicit material, and I'm cool with that. 2. I agree not to use this site to transmit or receive illegal material. Basically, this is CYA language so the site isn't responsible for the actions of the people who use it.

Bhruic -> RE: TOS question for Mods (12/28/2014 3:43:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: domincalifornia quote: ORIGINAL: Bhruic It seems to me that in the Terms of Service, the articles 6.3 and 7.3.13 are in conflict with each other. Can anyone clarify that? The only thing I can think of is, perhaps, some very specific definition of the word "obscene". "Obscene" is a legal term. Many countries have laws against "obscene" material, but the definition of what constitutes obscene varies from country to country. Basically, all the two points you site say is: 1. I understand that this sites contains sexually explicit material, and I'm cool with that. 2. I agree not to use this site to transmit or receive illegal material. Basically, this is CYA language so the site isn't responsible for the actions of the people who use it. I tend to agree with you, except that the TOS does not define the meaning of it's use of the word obscene. When a contract uses a common term that also has a legal definition, it is customary to stipulate that the word is being used in that legal context... otherwise meaning is open to interpretation. Colloquially, obscene and sexually explicit are often taken synonymously. Although, I guess the legal sense of the word is implicit, since you can't grant someone the right to do something illegal. Regarding nudity and profile pics... I mentioned this in another post: I have read the full text of the TOS for both Collarchat and Collarspace (they are the same) and there is no specific prohibition on nudity in the main profile pic. As I understand it, the TOS is a legally binding contract between the sites and the user for to use of either site. The user is legally obligated to adhere to the TOS in using the sites. As such though, the user is not legally obligated to any behavior not specified in the TOS. So, while nudity in the main profile pic may be undersireable, prohibiting it can not be enforced under the current TOS. While the site may have suggested not using nudes for your profile picture and hoped for the best, this may explain why they have not tried to enforce that "suggestion". Furthermore, given that the TOS provides for amendment, and the Sites have not seen fit to amend the TOS to include this prohibition on nude profile pics, I can only conclude that they don't see it as a big deal... since nude profile pics are entirely common on sites of this nature... and the policing of such a prohibition would be impractical.

Bhruic -> RE: TOS question for Mods (12/28/2014 3:49:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ExiledTyrant Ambiguity and contradiction allows the site to separate from users. This is a world wide site and laws vary from state to state, territory to territory, and country to country. Some things are legal some things are not, it is in the best interest of the site (the owner in particular) to neither condone nor condemn what is being done here so he can maintain legal separation. Jus sayin I totally agree... having read the document closely though, I wonder if that objective is being fully covered. It seems like there are some contradictions and loopholes, but I guess you would really have to have more awareness of precedent and contract law than I have to be sure.

ExiledTyrant -> RE: TOS question for Mods (12/28/2014 3:59:20 PM)
It is plausible deniability. By neither condoning or condemning the nature of the posts, but acknowledging that illegal topics (though not defined through any specific citation of any particular state, territory, nation) will not be allowed, pining them down as culpable would be near impossible.

domincalifornia -> RE: TOS question for Mods (12/28/2014 9:43:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bhruic I tend to agree with you, except that the TOS does not define the meaning of it's use of the word obscene, When a contract uses a common term that also has a legal definition, it is customary to stipulate that the word is being used in that legal context... otherwise meaning is open to interpretation.. Obscene is defined differently around the world. Basically, collarspace is just using legal boilerplate so that if any user violates any obscenity law around the world the site can say, "We told them not to do that." quote: ORIGINAL: Bhruic Colloquially, obscene and sexually explicit are often taken synonymously. Although, I guess the legal sense of the word is implicit, since you can't grant someone the right to do something illegal. They aren't synonymous at all. Something can be legally obscene without being sexually explicit, and something that is sexually explicit isn't necessarily obscene. quote: ORIGINAL: Bhruic As I understand it, the TOS is a legally binding contract between the sites and the user for to use of either site. The user is legally obligated to adhere to the TOS in using the sites. As such though, the user is not legally obligated to any behavior not specified in the TOS. I think you're overthinking this. TOS are just CYA boilerplate. By and large, a private site like this can toss you out for whatever it wants, regardless of what TOS says. All the language you're talking about is just a lawyers invention to distance the site from any actions the user take. quote: ORIGINAL: Bhruic Furthermore, given that the TOS provides for amendment, and the Sites have not seen fit to amend the TOS to include this prohibition on nude profile pics, I can only conclude that they don't see it as a big deal... since nude profile pics are entirely common on sites of this nature... and the policing of such a prohibition would be impractical. By and large, this site has no interest in policing profiles.

Spiritedsub2 -> RE: TOS question for Mods (12/28/2014 9:50:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: domincalifornia TOS are just CYA boilerplate This is my assessment too.

Bhruic -> RE: TOS question for Mods (12/29/2014 7:16:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: domincalifornia quote: ORIGINAL: Bhruic I tend to agree with you, except that the TOS does not define the meaning of it's use of the word obscene, When a contract uses a common term that also has a legal definition, it is customary to stipulate that the word is being used in that legal context... otherwise meaning is open to interpretation.. Obscene is defined differently around the world. Basically, collarspace is just using legal boilerplate so that if any user violates any obscenity law around the world the site can say, "We told them not to do that." Yes, I realize that. My point was just that a contract would normally say something like "Obscene, in the legal sense of the word, in the user's jurisdiction". Otherwise it is open to be interpreted in any sense of the word obscene... creating confusion not about what you can not do, but about what you CAN do. quote: ORIGINAL: domincalifornia quote: ORIGINAL: Bhruic Colloquially, obscene and sexually explicit are often taken synonymously. Although, I guess the legal sense of the word is implicit, since you can't grant someone the right to do something illegal. They aren't synonymous at all. Something can be legally obscene without being sexually explicit, and something that is sexually explicit isn't necessarily obscene. They can be synonymous if legal interpretations are not specified. Again... the obvious default position is that you can not do things which are illegal, but this wording creates confusion about what you CAN do. quote: ORIGINAL: domincalifornia quote: ORIGINAL: Bhruic As I understand it, the TOS is a legally binding contract between the sites and the user for to use of either site. The user is legally obligated to adhere to the TOS in using the sites. As such though, the user is not legally obligated to any behavior not specified in the TOS. I think you're overthinking this. TOS are just CYA boilerplate. By and large, a private site like this can toss you out for whatever it wants, regardless of what TOS says. All the language you're talking about is just a lawyers invention to distance the site from any actions the user take. Yes, I agree. It is likely some kind of boiler plate document, and I understand it's purpose to indemnify the site owners. However, the objective of legal documents is generally to be unambiguous... unless ambiguity somehow serves the authors, I guess. I don't see this particular ambiguity serving to protect the site owners, only to confuse the users, so it just seems like the TOS is poorly written in places. Given that I have seen people reference the TOS in many posts, and this on-going confusion about naked profile pics, it seemed like an interesting thing to delve in to. Granted... I am probably somewhat alone in my enjoyment of reading legal documents and Acts :)

SinFix -> RE: TOS question for Mods (12/29/2014 9:28:53 AM)
The other side used to state, under the area in your edit profile where you upload pictures , that no naked pics could be used as your PRIMARY pic.. If I recall it used to stated no naked for your avatar on this side... Note: it may have said genital pictures to be more specific, not necessarily naked... edited for clarity...

SinFix -> RE: TOS question for Mods (12/29/2014 9:36:17 AM)
Cause my damn brain tis not functioning well today.. The whole thing about naked pics was never actually in the TOS but a "supplement" that was put in when you uploaded pictures..

Gauge -> RE: TOS question for Mods (12/29/2014 11:25:49 AM)
This is a fast reply. The difficulty arises when one tries to define what is obscene and what is not. If I am not mistaken, and I more than likely am dead wrong on this, the site must follow the laws of the country where the servers are placed as well as the laws where the company is incorporated. There are obviously international law and the like to be followed as well, and so in order to cover themselves they must use a blanket term of "obscene" and deliberately not define it. If they were to put too fine of a point on what is obscene, or what exactly is against the rules and cite examples, the TOS would take up more of the server than the actual site would.

MariaB -> RE: TOS question for Mods (12/29/2014 12:09:46 PM)
A well written terms of service is to protect the owners of the site from the action of its members. Whilst Bhruic's quotes on TOS clearly seem to contradict one another, I'm sure the owner of CS took on legal advice when writing in his terms of service. Obscene is defined by territory and its up to us, the individual user, to find out and understand the obscenity laws of our own land.

LiveSpark -> RE: TOS question for Mods (12/29/2014 2:07:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SinFix Cause my damn brain tis not functioning well today.. The whole thing about naked pics was never actually in the TOS but a "supplement" that was put in when you uploaded pictures.. Just blame it on having consumed too much turkey lol.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625