Linden Lab has produced a strong statement of new policy (yes, that post by Daniel Linden last week) which purports to restrict both items which are illegal in some jurisdictions, and some which aren't. Although exactly what is restricted is not clear. One content creator who declined to be named told me, "I can't do business like this. I don't know which of my creations might subject me to 'account sanctions' and which are fine. Do I have to guess? The only way for me to be sure is to ask Linden Lab to approve each design in advance."

There's obviously no process for that, nor do I think Linden Lab wants to be in that position. However, this would appear to be the position that they have ultimately forced themselves into. Something to remember is that tort liability is proportional to the amount of editorial control (though even a very little can be very expensive).

Nonetheless, Linden Lab has commenced sanctions against individuals and businesses, we are told, and creators and businesses are not sure if they infringe or if they do not. The stated policies are not clear enough for the individual resident to decide if something falls under that or not. Linden Lab says that this vagueness is intentional.

What constitutes a depiction or portrayal of rape? Intent and consent are not part of an image. What would be in a Second Life snapshot that would make it a portrayal of rape, as opposed to two people having consensual sex? One of the partners restrained?

I, as a resident, do not know where the line is, so I cannot decide if some content has crossed it or not. Linden Lab "in its sole discretion" decides what content to act against, and what to leave alone, without transparency of policy.

Now the big question - In your opinion, does that constitute the exercise of editorial control over resident content or not? After all, residents are not availed of enough information to make those decisions. The decisions are being made for them and may come as a surprise.