Editorials
Community Standards
By Editorial Staff
Apr 18, 2008, 06:08

The revelations regarding PBNation and inappropriate content just keep on coming.

68Caliber has been engaging in an exhaustive review of content on the site - in PUBLICLY accessible areas - and has found numerous examples of questionable materials, ranging from images posted in threads to Version IV of a 'Sex Guide' that covers everything from lubricants to 'rough' sex.  That particular entry consists of some 65 pages of posts (40 posts to a page average) and had commentary added as recently as 4/18/08 - yesterday as of this writing.  (Versions I and II are also available.)*

First, it is our duty and responsibility to explain some terms and our perspective on this issue:

When we reference 'inappropriate material', we are speaking in the context of material that is either socially inappropriate for minors, illegal for minors, or both.  Adults are free to do what they wish, but our society determined long ago that it is appropriate for different rules to apply to minors.

Like most paintball-oriented websites, PBNation is open for membership to both adults and minors.  Registration requires acceptance of a terms of service agreement that prohibits illegal activities.  It also requires a declaration that the registering individual is 13 years of age or older.  However, posts and materials in posts, so long as they are in public forums, are accessible to anyone, regardless of age.  Registration is not required to gain access.  Credit cards are not required for age verification during sign-up.  In fact, very little is done on the part of the administrators of the site to control access - or even the routine posting of materials that are in violation of the site's own publicly stated rules.

That there is a large amount of material on the site that could be construed as inappropriate for minors is without question at this point in time - 'sex, drugs and rock-n-roll' are rampant.  The presence of large number of minors on the site is also obvious - one need only look at the industry's demographics (or read a handful of posts) to verify this fact.   This then, of course, begs the question - who decides what is 'inappropriate'?

The 'Miller Test' has routinely been used by US Courts to make a determination of whether something is 'obscene' or not; materials deemed 'offensive' are not necessarily obscene and are protected under our rights to free speech.  Materials deemed obscene are not so protected.

Here is the 'Miller Test':

Whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest,

Whether the work depicts/describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct or excretory functions specifically defined by applicable state law,

Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.

Numerous cases have reached the Federal Court system, attempting to define what can and can not be placed on the internet (as well as displayed in stores, shown on hotel television screens, distributed through the mail, etc); so far, all laws designed to restrict pornography on the web have been struck down by the Supreme Court or returned to lower courts based on constitutional issues, primarily our right to freedom of speech/expression.

COPA -the Child Online Protection Act - was one such congressional bit of legislation designed to protect minors from online pornography, which it described as:

'any communication, picture, image, graphic image file, article, recording, writing, or other matter of any kind that is obscene or that--
'(A) the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find, taking the material as a whole and with respect to minors, is designed to appeal to, or is designed to pander to, the prurient interest;
'(B) depicts, describes, or represents, in a manner patently offensive with respect to minors, an actual or simulated sexual act or sexual contact, an actual or simulated normal or perverted sexual act, or a lewd exhibition of the genitals or post-pubescent female breast; and
'(C) taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or; scientific value for minors.'

 COPA has been overturned on several occasions and is still making its rounds through the courts.

Significantly, both COPA and the Miller test reference 'contemporary community standards'.  Although not rigorously defined, 'community standards' is the concept that each and every individual community gets to define what is and is not acceptable.

It is clear, however, that the community referenced is NOT the internet community that posts materials, it is the viewers and receivers of that material that form the 'community'.  What flies in San Francisco may be (probably is) totally at odds with what's acceptable in Decatur, Georgia. 

Fortunately or unfortunately, the use of a community standards test favors conservative viewpoints.  Mrs. Bluenose, who faints at the sight of a naked ankle, is usually the one who gets to set the bar.  Thus, the battle. One that has been relegated to the individual States to resolve.  The content that you legally view in Manhattan might get you lynched in Biloxi.

 Child pornography is, per se, illegal.  You can't possess it, you can't distribute it, you can't link to it, period. 

Providing pornographic materials to minors - pornography of the 'adult' variety (in all its forms, text, images, drawings, audio, etc) is variously illegal and is governed by the individual states.  In most states, minors can not purchase nudie magazines, can't enter sex toy shops, can't go to strip clubs, and are not allowed to download or view internet sites that publish pornographic material.  Providing a means that allows minors to circumvent state laws that govern such activity is also illegal.

In the opinion of a lot of 'communities', there is a lot of material currently viewable on PBNation that would be deemed 'inappropriate for minors'.  Depending on the breaks, it's also likely that some of it would be interpreted as illegal for minors to have access to, again, depending on the State and their interpretation of the local community standards.

However, the most important question is not really whether some Maiden Aunt living deep in the Bible Belt would take issue with some of the posts.  The real question is whether the LARGER paintball community, not just the members of PBNation, finds this activity acceptable or not.

*All of these materials have been backed up for reference and further review purposes and will be made available upon request to appropriate authorities.