Forwarded to friends whose children have accounts

[teddywolf]

LJ says it will no longer allow new accounts to be made for children under age 13. Buried in the privacy policy (not the TOS) is that they reserve the right to take down a posting if they determine that the person posting it was under age 13 at the time. They say this is due to lack of parental notification/agreement they've had in the past N years.

Parents, don't let your babies grow up to be LJers - unless they're age 13+ already (oy).

Comments

[teddywolf.livejournal.com]

I think they are basing it off humans, who are the only critters able to sign legal contracts at this point. When dogs, computers and Kyrptonians are formally recognized as able to sign contracts I think we might see some very strange legal permutations...

[quietann.livejournal.com]

I don't think that's ever not been standard policy at LJ.

[teddywolf.livejournal.com]

Previously a child could open an account with parental permission. Now there will not be any such accounts even with parental permission.

[azaz-al.livejournal.com]

I thought that always had been the policy.

[teddywolf.livejournal.com]

Previously a child could open an account with parental permission. Now there will not be any such accounts even with parental permission.

[chanaleh.livejournal.com]

What I want to know is, what is this going to signify for all the parents who create LJ handles for their babies at birth?

[teddywolf.livejournal.com]

That really is a good question. I don't know the answer. I suppose it depends on whether the parent is the owner of the account for the first 13 years or not. I suppose we should ask LJ Admin-land.