If that’s what you are saying, then it leads to the conclusion I think you’re drawing: that international internet-specific law/agreements ought to apply (though that raises another question — *what* agreements, domain dispute rules, etc.?)

Can you nail down the specifics on this so we’re talking the same terms?

The argument I think you’re going to end up dealing with here is that the server side stuff isn’t open, so *that* is a Linden Lab service (more like the old proprietary AOL or Prodigy services) at least for now.

“Alas, Second Life is not the “Internet” — not yet. Technically, from a legal point of view, it’s a service provided by a Californian company, even if well over 95% of its users are not in California. Still, since Linden Lab is bound to remain in San Francisco for quite a long time, they have no option but to comply with local, state, and federal laws.”

While it IS a service provided by a Californian company, that service extends beyond the borders of California and the United States. That makes it subject to international law.

You’re also opening up a can of worms – and quite likely creating fractures in virtual worlds. Where that can be avoided, it should.

It seems rather lazy and perhaps even irresponsible that virtual world law is not involved in internet governance. While internet governance legalities may not be as exciting as some may wish, well – most of the world lives outside the United States. As intenet penetration increases around the globe, the case for a US control decreases daily – if you believe in democracy. And the majority of SL users exist outside of the United States.

And as far as that goes, legal precedents exist where the location of where the content is viewed is where the laws are applied.

I keep saying internet governance over and over. I don’t see why anyone would avoid those issues, since virtual worlds obviously inherit from the technological and legal base.

If money is passing over geopolitical borders… which it is… where does that leave all of this? Linden Lab pays taxes (we assume), but do other Lindex exchanges?

What about publishing standards for interoperability with the Second Life grid and letting completely foreign operators build transparently accessible server farms governed by their own local laws? LL would still be selling subscriptions to US citizens, but it hardly seems any worse than Qwest selling internet access to US citizens who use it to bet on sports on foreign sites. Do you see any problems there (aside from the obvious business concerns, etc.)?

Benjamin: Setting up servers in other places won’t do it. The US claims the right, routinely, to regulate the behavior of US-based people/entities when they’re operating outside of the US.

As long as Linden and/or the individuals that control it wish to enter the country, they’re going to, at some level, be subject to US laws.

Note, for instance, that setting up their servers AND being organized as a company elsewhere AND not being citizens of the US did not help David Carruthers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Carruthers) who was arrested on a transit flight to Costa Rica via Dallas (where he was arrested) because his company had accepted online wagers from US citizens.

–matt