Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/index.ez?viewLink=522

Dear Renderosity Members: As Renderosity continues to grow and evolve we find that we have to fine-tune our TOS from time to time. With that being said, we will be making some necessary changes around child nudity on the site. These changes are a result of a combination of several factors: feedback from the community, consistency between the marketplace and the community and the legal liability surrounding child nudity and pornography. The following changes will go into effect today, Monday, March 21, 2005. (There will be a few weeks of education before warnings will be issued for violations): No Child Nudity: Images of children or characters resembling children (including teens, pre adolescent, child like fairies and other imaginary figures) under 18 years of age, depicting nudity are no longer permitted. Child Image Guidelines: # No child nudity of any kind which includes no exposed chest, buttocks or genitals. # No images in which characters under the age of 18 give the appearance of having no clothes. # No use of: transparent clothes, blurring of nude areas, or the use of blots or Censored wording or props to cover areas that are otherwise not clothed. # No depictions of young humanoid characters/children giving the appearance of being under the age of 18 displayed in erotic, seductive, provocative poses or context. # Since age is difficult to identify with 3D images, this will be at the discretion of the Renderosity team. We respectfully request all members please review their galleries and make any necessary updates based on these new guidelines. Going forward, as we are made aware of images that were posted prior to the new TOS change...and are now considered violating the new TOS, we will notify the artist of the new TOS change and remove the image/s. Within the next couple of weeks, we will be communicating and educating those artists that are uploading images that reflect the previous TOS guidelines. This education will take place for a period of several weeks and then warnings will be given at the discretion of the Renderosity team. If you find an image that needs to be reviewed, please send the URL to admin@renderosity.com. Here you can review the TOS. We feel this is a positive move for the entire community. We apologize for any inconvenience and we hope you understand the value these changes will bring. Working together we can have the best Community possible! Thanks, The Renderosity Team

We feel this is a positive move for the entire community. I wish I could agree. I think it's really sad that cupids and bearskin rug pictures are now deemed as "unsuitable." (sigh) I wait for the day when the pendulum stays in the middle.

Thank you again, Janet Jackson...

"We feel this is a positive move for the entire community."

Really? I think you will find you are the only ones that do. This is the dictat of a fascist regime and a step too far. Perhaps a more accurate statement would be "We feel this ia a positive move towards higher profits". Genitals is one thing, but a bare chest! Fgs what's it all coming to?! I will voice my opinion in the only effective way I can think of. I will no longer buy from the renderosity marketplace.

Jack Edited once I calmed down

Message edited on: 03/21/2005 11:54

I'm sure we will see in the next few days if the community at large agrees with this change. I feel its overkill big time and it saddens me.

unfortunately the only way to show disagreement is by not buying anymore from the marketplace. Sorry for the merchants, but we won't buy anymore either.

Well, my daughters used to run around naked in the garden when they were smaller. And nobody gave a damn. BUT - thanks to Rosity, I now understand that it was actually filthy, obscene and immoral of them to do so - and of me to allow it. I thought it was just kids with no clothes on, but gee wow, how wrong could I be! Rosity spreads the ultra-conservative gospel over the world, creating ripples, changing cultures..... lucky us to be taught how things work. :] Fish

Well, to be somewhat of a devil's advocate, policies like this don't happen in a vacuum. All it takes is one allegation of "kiddie porn" from the wrong person and R'Osity could find itself in a world of hurt, legally speaking. I don't like this policy, either, but in the current cultural climate, they may felt they had no choice.

While I can understand the reasoning as to why Renderosity did this (prohibiting child nudity leaves no question as to interpretation of what is acceptable or not), it opens up another can of worms. I understand that rules are rules .. and I understand that a lot of art is subject to interpretation. However, to prohibit ALL child nudity because of concerns about child pornography is, in my opinion, the equivalent of not selling textures for V3 any more because they could be used to make porn flicks.

Deecay wrote (sigh) I wait for the day when the pendulum stays in the middle. There will be no middle ... This is a private site so the admins here are making the TOS and there are only 2 ways: 1. accept them 2. don't accept them TOS is made from someones point of view so you can agree them and have a real good time here or you don't agree them and then you have to leave this place. I do not have any problems with nudity (adult nudity in any form) but I have with Child nudity. So if you want to see 10 years old looking naked Fearies (or something simular), please go somewhere else. I agree with the new TOS ... thumbs up! Just my 2 Cents Greets Chris

# No child nudity of any kind which includes no exposed chest, buttocks or genitals. So beach scenes with a boy with his shirt off are out? Clarification, not sh*t stirring, honestly. I'm trying to figure out just how broad this is.

Watch out for images of newborns! Ahhhhh kiddie porn!! What, 2 minutes old? Well, get dressed ferchrissake. :] Fish

Chris, I was talking about the pendulum in the broad sense, not just at this site. In the past few years, we have seen the "moral majority" forcing their opinions down on the entire world, about what is right and what is wrong. The pendulum has swung too far to the right. I won't get into a philosophical diatribe about the way things should be, because it will throw this thread way off topic ... but what has happened is that the opinions of a very vocal few have basically decided that anyone who puts a nude or partially nude child in their art work, regardless of whether or not it has erotic intent, are "child pornographers" who feed the interests of pedophiles. That is pure bunk. I am not saying I want to fill my galleries with pictures of nude children, but putting further restrictions on the TOS wasn't the best way to handle the situation.

FishNose wrote: Watch out for images of newborns! Ahhhhh kiddie porn!! What, 2 minutes old? Well, get dressed ferchrissake. :] Fish where is your problen? Renderosity has changed their TOS, thats the disussion here ... I think its not everyones point of view of childs porn or something like that. Greets Chris

While this likely won't affect me seeing as I never have and currently have no plans to in the future do any images with nudity of a child/faerie/whatever, I do think this is a bit of overkill. Surely there ought to be some way of regulating this without such stringent guidelines. The bearskin rug suggested above would be only one example. How the backside of a child on a bareskin rug could possibly be deemed offensive is beyond me. Or what about a boy running around in diapers? He'd have a bare chest, but would be deleted or forbidden under these rules. Or even a fun little bathtime scene with a kid in the tub playing with toys (strategically placed of course so that no genitals showed in the first place). Perhaps the rules needed some slight tweaking. Overkill they certainly did not need. And I find it difficult to believe that such images could ever be construed as child pornography or have any sort of legal liability. Sounds more like somebody wants to take the easy way out instead of make critical decisions on a case by case basis. Blanket rules such as this are never the way to go IMO.

Well, of course you change the rule again after banning a few members first. Like I said before, "shoot first, ask questions later." << this must be in the moderators hand book. How are you going to earn respect from the members? I miss those days when the mods actually listen to members first instead of their bosses wallets. But then if you don't listen to you bosses wallets, you get fired. What a dilenma.

Deecay: I have understood you right ... as I said ... this is a discussion of the change of the TOS here not a philosophical or what else discussion about child porn od filling galleries with images of naked childs. we can open a new thread and discuss our point of views there :) I think too much ppl are getting personally offended when a thread opens like this one ;) Greets Chris

chris, see jwiest's post above. Very succinct and to the point. This is precisely what I'm on about - explained nicely, without irony. Good thing someone has the patiece to spell it out :o) :] Fish

JVRenderer wrote: I miss those days when the mods actually listen to members first instead of their bosses wallets. But then if you don't listen to you bosses wallets, you get fired. What a dilenma. Loooong ago .... loooong .... ago :) greets Chris

The "GIRL" looks 14 yrs old....let the purge begin!!! Seriously though, the internet is a BIG place Fairywylde allows all sorts of nekkid little girl stuff so go there if it s what you want. rosity is a private site their servers, where my gallery images are stored, are PRIVATE PROPERTY. and we are here as invited guests NOT constitutionally mandated residents for life this effects me in no way at all as i never do the kiddie stuff. so be it, :-)

IRT - rowan_crisp "So beach scenes with a boy with his shirt off are out? Clarification, not sh*t stirring, honestly. I'm trying to figure out just how broad this is. " If the figure depicted appears under 18, yes, they are out. MorriganShadow Poser Coordinator

I'm sorry, but I have a hard time getting too upset over a "perv" getting his jollies from a computer generated image of a person who doesn't really exist, regardless of the context. There is an easily discerned distinction between pedophiles stalking real children in a public place and someone getting over-stimulated by a fake image on the internet.

ok ok ... FishNose, is some points I can agree what he wrote ... maybe I need to think about it a bit. But mainly I agree with the new TOS . Greets Chris

Wolf - did it occur to you that Laura (standard default Laura from DAZ) is 'nekkid little girl stuff'? She's naked when you load her! AAAARRGHHH And so is Luke! And the little ones Maddie & Matt, and - the Milbaby!! Oh woe.... this means that Salt Lake City-based DAZ is a kiddie porn site! AAAAAH Nooooo (Rolls eyes) :] Fish - ooh sarky, sarky

If the figure depicted appears under 18, yes, they are out. Oh my ever loving God. This is very, very sad. 8-(

Okay. Its the new guidelines. You have the law and I said okay. Indeed, I think that I havent any pic of this topic (hey, The Girl are older than 18 !!!! ) ... but ... ... all is sin, all is bad ... next? "no swords, they increase violence"; "no nudes, they increase rapes"; "no ARTWORKS, they increase THOUGHTS". And remember, Big Brother is watching you and he knows that youre a potential delinquent "America, the land of freedom". Where you go, America, where you go ... Since 30 years ago when here in Spain died General Franco and ended his dictatorship, all the freedoms that we have gained, you have lost them. Sad. (Fishnose, two kids, boy of 5 and girl of 2. Always nudist beaches. Never a trouble. They know that they have a body under the clothes and the other people too)

MorriganShadow, Thank you. You now have my registered opposition to this policy - not that it matters, does it? sigh

I'm still waiting on the answer to the boy/bathing suit issue as there is no fully body bathing suits for boys that I can find. Also what about the Millunium Baby? It doesn't have a shirt on is that also not allowed? I'm not one to usually get involved in these type of discussions (except to make fun of them) but this TOS change is too over the top. So what's the next step. No pictures with children in them period? Then the only people that'll come here are the ones looking for pictures of nude women in temples. I hope I'm wrong in thinking this, but I can't shake the feeling that this is just the admins way of saying 'if you question us, and we'll just slap you with tougher rules.' just keep in mind when you're reveiwing TOS changes -- you stifle art too much with rules then it just becomes crafts. Basket weaving anyone?

"When they came for the gypsies, I did not speak, for I am not a gypsy. When they came for the Jews, I did not speak, because I wasn't a Jew. When they came for the Catholics, I did not speak, for I am not a Catholic. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak." Think about it. "When they came for the painters of fairies, I did not speak, for I am not a painter of fairies. When they came for the painters of childhood summers on the beach, I did not speak, because I wasn't a painter of childhood summers on the beach. When they came for the painters of babies on rugs, I did not speak, for I am not a painter of babies on rugs. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak." Think about it again when pictures of ANY child, however it is dressed is banned. Or when they decide (at first) to ban pictures showing adult genitalia. Jack

I'd like clarification regarding nude images of 'The Girl' As she is of undetermined age, what is Renderosity's policy here?

By their definition the Incredibles is a Kiddie porn film... after all Jack Jack is topless (GASP!) Also that old famous coppertone add showing the kid's butt crack. Ah well I better shut up before Headmistress Umbridge punishes me.

Aiko too: as she's more of a fantasy/anime/unreal character, can any one tell me how old SHE is and what images depicting her will be allowed???

So what's the next step. No pictures with children in them period? Then the only people that'll come here are the ones looking for pictures of nude women in temples. Exactly. If this policy is being done because of the concern about child pornography, then what about the other images that push the edge? The images that have Vicky in bondage gear. Oh, but that's OK, we will hide it behind the nudity tag. But it is also illegal to expose minors to pornographic content. If fairies are considered pornographic, then what about the 14 year old kid that goes beyond the nudity flag and sees miss Victoria on her knees in leather? If you are going to enforce the morality issue on the membership, then you might as well do it all the way and not allow nudity at all, like DAZ does.

Thanks for that vote of support FishNose. :) I suppose you could still do the beach scenes, you'd just have to get the kids from behind while wearing bottoms. That would appear to fit the rules and still allow them to be on the beach with no top...same would apply for the other pictures as well I guess. Still seems rather pathetic that it's come to this, but since it's play by the rules or don't post at the site, I'm pretty sure most will play by the rules, with or without the grumbling.

"and we are here as invited guests" ha ha ha better change that in dear valued customers.

lemur, Nah, this isn't like that t'all. We've got other sites that let us post what we wish, and pay attention to their members' wishes. The victims of the holocaust (jews, gypsies, gays, political dissidents) didn't have that option.

well I guess I got my answer while I was typeing To quote someone above... "Luckily we still live in a democracy where you have that choice to make! " Do we?

Well, here in Spain have identity card. We have printed in it our births day and year Need I to draw all my doubtful character with the identity card well visible? In the mouth? As a police roundup? WHOOOAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA :D (Sorry, Rosity. I know that the law isnt yours, you only follow the law. But those who govern you, from here they seem a little sick)

It doesn't matter how much everyone wants to Bitch and moan about it, the decision has been made, we either adhere to the TOS or we don't and go elsewhere. Rules and regulations are with us in every aspect of our lives, if we disagree with them then try to change them as per the "democratic" process. If that doesn't work then we all have a choice of what to do!!

Attached Link: COTG

Regarding this line -- No Child Nudity: Images of children or characters resembling children (including teens, pre adolescent, child like fairies and other imaginary figures) under 18 years of age, depicting nudity are no longer permitted. Specifically the "other imaginary figures" Would that include our Children of the Greys ? See link. --Rebekah--

We do have a choice, and i'm exercising it by not buying anything from the rosity market place in future. Jack

Sixus1: you should make some cloths for them ;) greets Chris

Rebekah, I know. I'm curious about that too. I'm going to resist my urge to ask if the Millenium foal has to wear a saddle at all times, or a blanket... ;)

And you have wondered, Rosity, how many members (and how many sales in the marketplace) are you going to lose for this nice decission of cutting the freedoms? How many people are going to stop of upload artwork? How many people are going to emigrate to Renderot ... er ... to other sites that I dont remember its name? Bored. Case closed. I go away. I go to draw some cupids. With burka. Salam aleikum.-

What if the creature in question doesn't have genitals and never did or nipples ?? --Rebekah-- And how can you tell the age or 'apparent' age of a lot of these "other imaginary figures" ??

how do the make kids without genitales? ;) just a thought :) Greets Chris

utoh, I better get some clothes for the storybook dragon, the millennium kitten, and the millennium puppy.

Did someone mention "puppies"!!! I like puppies!

DAZ3DS emotiguy is NUDE !!!!!

Chris, I'd wildly belived that the 'greys' are somewhat asexial and reproduce through artifical means (ie cloning) just as the Asgaurd on Stargate (the Asgaurd btw are the greys)

Nah i think all textures and figures in the marketplace will be ok. Rosity won't do anything to hurt their profits. What's got up my nose is the extent they are taking this to, i mean.... bare chest?! Fgs! Jack