Just goes to show you that Face Book is taken more seriously than Second Life. ;)
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 7:08 PM, Pat Rapp <[email protected]> wrote: > Interesting … > > > > http://bit.ly/8ZRbw5 > > > > “Under Italian law the virtual burglar's actions are considered "aggravated > entry" and can draw penalties of up to five years in prison.” > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On > Behalf Of *Alicia Henn > *Sent:* Friday, October 22, 2010 5:00 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Av Rights > > > > http://www.jmir.org/2010/3/e28/ > > This is an interesting article on rights for avatars. It seems reasonable > and yet ludicrous at the same time. My officemate and I have had a great > time expanding on it. - Alicia > > Get Your Paws off of My Pixels: Personal Identity and Avatars as Self > > Mark Alan Graber1,2, MD; Abraham David Graber3, BA > > *ABSTRACT* > > There is an astounding silence in the peer-reviewed literature regarding > what rights a person ought to expect to retain when being represented by an > avatar rather than a biological body. Before one can have meaningful ethical > discussions about informed consent in virtual worlds, avatar bodily > integrity, and so on, the status of avatars vis-à-vis the self must first be > decided. We argue that as another manifestation of the individual, an > individual’s avatar should have rights analogous to those of a biological > body. Our strategy will be to show that (1) possessing a physical body is > not a necessary condition for possessing rights; (2) rights are already > extended to representations of a person to which no biological consciousness > is attached; and (3) when imbued with intentionality, some prostheses become > “self.” We will then argue that avatars meet all of the conditions necessary > to be protected by rights similar to those enjoyed by a biological body. The > structure of our argument will take the form of a conditional. We will argue > that *if* a user considers an avatar an extension of the self, *then* the > avatar has rights analogous to the rights of the user. Finally, we will > discuss and resolve some of the objections to our position including > conflicts that may arise when more than one individual considers an avatar > to be part of the self. > > *(J Med Internet Res 2010;12(3):e28)* > doi:10.2196/jmir.1299 > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<r-spec%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<r-spec%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en.
