ALL PORN IS CHILD PORN! :o

[Brinnie]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/06/24/us_law_2257/

 

[R. Richard]

ALL PORN IS CHILD PORN???

The law seems only to apply to picture porn. Thus Literotica is OK. However the entire idea is a crock of feces IMNTHO.

 

[SlickTony]

I was having trouble seeing how that could apply to fictional characters in a prose setting.

 

[minsue]

Does that make it ok???

 

[SlickTony]

Does that make it ok???

Of course not.

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

I was having trouble seeing how that could apply to fictional characters in a prose setting.

Well if they really had a bone to pick with us, they could probably just nail us on the explicit AVs. Or they could just nail us for no reason. I doubt Manu or Laurel would be in any position to go into a lengthy show trial with the US government.

 

[Halo_n_horns]

This is what happens when you have a bunch of God-mongers in control of the government.

On the one hand I can see how something like this should have been in place all along. But on the other hand, it's entirely too obvious that the real sentiments behind this are to lay the path to abolish pornography in all its forms in the name of "God."

No, right now this does not apply to Literotica. But if we don't get this shit under control it will.

 

[SeaCat]

Okay the concept behind this law is a good one and I agree with it. Let's make it harder to produce, posses, or pass along child porn. A noble cause. However I have a hard time with the law itself and the way in which i is supposed to work. Anyone produing pornographic material with photos or pictures is supposed to have on file the information identifying the "models" used complete with their nams and addresses. This information would then in effect become public record. (Okay so having this information might prove that the models are over the age of eighteen but having it as a public record leaves these models open to all sorts of nastyness including stalking. I wonder if the victim would then be able to sue the government for putting them at risk. Would this not be considered negligence by the government? Is Johny Cochrane still around?) And how will this in fact cut down on Child Porn?

Another point I don't understand is how does this cut down on the Child Porn coming in from other countries? Especially over the Internet? Is the government going to start monitoring the Internet and somehow shu down the international websites? If so are they going to do so electronicly? (Cyberwarfare?) Or are they going to start sanctions against the countries these sites orgiinate in until those countries shut them down?

Don't we already have laws against child porn? (I know many people see this as another attempt of the United States Government to shut own all porn sites on the Internet.) Would it not have been better if the government had instead of making another law just enforced the ones it had on the books?

Cat

 

[Brinnie]

ALL PORN IS CHILD PORN???

The law seems only to apply to picture porn. Thus Literotica is OK...

http://forums.offtopic.com/forumdisplay.php?f=2

 

[Brinnie]

Okay the concept behind this law is a good one and I agree with it. Let's make it harder to produce, posses, or pass along child porn. A noble cause.

If that was really the underlining motivation. Bush said it himself 3 years ago, when he launched the war on pornography "there is no place for porn in modern society".

moving right along...

However I have a hard time with the law itself and the way in which i is supposed to work. Anyone produing pornographic material with photos or pictures is supposed to have on file the information identifying the "models" used complete with their nams and addresses. This information would then in effect become public record. (Okay so having this information might prove that the models are over the age of eighteen but having it as a public record leaves these models open to all sorts of nastyness including stalking.

indeed it does. That's where they win. No one here, or on any forum/website is going to submit their photo ID along with their pics. That's why the people is calling it an "impossible feat"

Next...

I wonder if the victim would then be able to sue the government for putting them at risk.

One should only hope so.
The US wants Europe to comply with these revisions if they wish to continue trade. What they are finding out is that it is ILLEGAL to violate privacy in such a manner under the British government. Well, the British government basically said "fuck you" to that last week. And it's justified. analysts predict In 3 years the European porn market share WILL ACCOUNT FOR MORE THAN 50%.

Would this not be considered negligence by the government?

By many, yes.

Is Johny Cochrane still around?

Is Larry Flynt still around?

And how will this in fact cut down on Child Porn?

It won't. [READ HERE] <---- one of my better posts

Another point I don't understand is how does this cut down on the Child Porn coming in from other countries? Especially over the Internet? Is the government going to start monitoring the Internet and somehow shu down the international websites?

They've been doing it for years. We cannot access many webpages in many small countries that are not compliant with our existing child porn laws, such as lithuania.

If so are they going to do so electronicly? (Cyberwarfare?) Or are they going to start sanctions against the countries these sites orgiinate in until those countries shut them down?

They'll try. Their case is weakening. And if you fight it, (add a free speech banner to your website or sig) it weakens it more as it promotes awareness.

Don't we already have laws against child porn?

you ask a lot of questions... How did you let it get this far?

(I know many people see this as another attempt of the United States Government to shut own all porn sites on the Internet.) Would it not have been better if the government had instead of making another law just enforced the ones it had on the books?

Actually, this whole 2257 bullshit is a revision of the old 2257 bullshit.

Cat

here's your fucn link of the day:
http://rightvoices.com/archives/2005/06/23/2257-minus-1-minus-4/

 

[Brinnie]

This is what happens when you have a bunch of God-mongers in control of the government.

On the one hand I can see how something like this should have been in place all along. But on the other hand, it's entirely too obvious that the real sentiments behind this are to lay the path to abolish pornography in all its forms in the name of "God."

No, right now this does not apply to Literotica. But if we don't get this shit under control it will.

Right now, it applies to every US webmaster who's website(s) have nude pics... After they've nailed and jailed the smut producers, they'll come here.

 

[Kalentros]

Just my take on things......

I agree that producers of adult oriented material should have proof of age on file. But what has happened with 2257 is just another attempt by Big Brother W and the Radical Right to control what we are allowed to see, hear, and eventually think.

What is truely sickening isn't the fact that this has been passed as law. What is truely sickening is how so many people are willing to sit back and let these sort of things happen over...and over...and over again. Yet these same people trumpet the horrific violence that we are exposed to as proof of how our righteous and nobel causes spread "democracy". Personally, I'd much rather look at two people fucking each other than killing each other.

Look around men and women, it's not going to be much longer until sex itself is deemed illegal, and the only way we're allowed to procreate is through government sanctioned fertillity clinics.

You might think I'm being paranoid, but look at the people who are controlling the people who run our lives. Do you honestly think that they won't stop until they control every aspect of our lives and mold it into their "perfect society". I seem to remember another group who tried the same thing.

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

I agree that producers of adult oriented material should have proof of age on file. But what has happened with 2257 is just another attempt by Big Brother W and the Radical Right to control what we are allowed to see, hear, and eventually think.

What is truely sickening isn't the fact that this has been passed as law. What is truely sickening is how so many people are willing to sit back and let these sort of things happen over...and over...and over again. Yet these same people trumpet the horrific violence that we are exposed to as proof of how our righteous and nobel causes spread "democracy". Personally, I'd much rather look at two people fucking each other than killing each other.

Look around men and women, it's not going to be much longer until sex itself is deemed illegal, and the only way we're allowed to procreate is through government sanctioned fertillity clinics.

You might think I'm being paranoid, but look at the people who are controlling the people who run our lives. Do you honestly think that they won't stop until they control every aspect of our lives and mold it into their "perfect society". I seem to remember another group who tried the same thing.

That's because we as a people love to inflict pain on others. Rubberneck watching each other bleed in the roadways, drive each other to madness and suicide while we laugh at not getting caught or blamed, reduce each other to tears as we shred each other apart in all conceivable ways. We love to revel in the bloodshed, the shredded bodies. We're jacking off in unison on corpses and we couldn't be happier.

We're all the serial killers who couldn't be arsed to hang around dormitories in the middle of the night.

 

[College_geek]

*scratches head* So that means that porn with older people...who are clearly 70 years old...still counts as child porn? That's pretty fucked up.

 

[CrazyyAngel]

Well ... I'd say that means the porn sites move their servers outside the US to prevent any prosecution. But this shouldn't have been passed in the first place.

But this line in the article just cracked me up:

According to BoingBoing, Rotten.com has taken down ratemyboner.com and gapingmaw.com ...

 

[Kalentros]

*scratches head* So that means that porn with older people...who are clearly 70 years old...still counts as child porn? That's pretty fucked up.

Yes it means exactly that.

 

[visionskate]

I like Alf, he wuz from melmack and used to chase lucky around. But thanks to cruel fate i dont think he ever caught the fiendish cat.
porn
child porn
snow white and the seven dwarves
whatever

LONG LIVE POP ROCKS

 

[oggbashan]

Outsourcing Rules

It seems to me that the way around this legislation is to host all 'porn' outside the US. There are many countries very happy to do just that.

Another US industry destroyed by its own government.

It probably applies to Literotica as well because of the AVs and the picture threads even if the pictures are pictures of ourselves. I don't think my AV is pornographic but much porn is in the eye of the beholder.

Og

 

[Brinnie]

Well ... I'd say that means the porn sites move their servers outside the US to prevent any prosecution. But this shouldn't have been passed in the first place.

But this line in the article just cracked me up:

for bigger sites that won't work.

people who are affiliates with Hustler, Playboy, etc...

 

[oggbashan]

for bigger sites that won't work.

people who are affiliates with Hustler, Playboy, etc...

If banks and insurance companies can move their operations to SE Asia I don't see why Hustler and Playboy can't.

Og

 

[sweetnpetite]

No, right now this does not apply to Literotica. But if we don't get this shit under control it will.

Sure it does. 1- it affects it's advertisers (which support it), 2nd we have an ammature picture forum https://forum.literotica.com/forumdisplay.php?f=8:and 3rd, there are a few other ereas on lit that include pics (or did).

 

[bridgeburner]

All producers of adult content were already required to retain proof of legal age on any performers in their films appearing nude or performing sex acts. This requirement has been around for years. Legitimate production houses all have a Custodian of Records who keeps proof of age files on their performers. Requiring second, third, fourth, Nth-party suppliers to also retain these same records is what puts the hurt on.

Here's why the big companies aren't making the fuss that they should:

money


The new law means that a lot of porn which has no current or locatable records is now illegal. This means there's a market to make even more new porn which the big companies can make money off of ---- unlike all the old porn that can be located for free or discounted rates. It also puts a heavy burden on the Mom & Pop sites who may buy their content second or third hand and have no access to the original records.

The big companies see that with a little bit of effort they can comply with the new law and by not fighting the law they benefit from the elimination of a lot of competing product.

Additionally, if things were to get worse, the big companies have the means to incorporate and move their content to servers outside the country. You might be surprised at how many of the big companies are no longer listed as American businesses. Used to be everyone incorporated in Nevada for tax purposes. Now they incorporate in Canada or the Caymans or any other place where they can do business as they please without the heavy Right hand of the U.S. Government on their necks.


-B

 

[sweetnpetite]

Except that older porn isn't usually covered by new laws. Plus, if they are required to keep records for seven years, then porn that was 20 years old would be in the clear anyway.

I don't think this includes 'old porn' that much. I think, however that it does specifically target 'ametour porn' which is probably really cutting into the bigger busineses. With so much free smut, many people never bother to buy a HUstler or a Playboy.

 

[Quiet_Cool]

All producers of adult content were already required to retain proof of legal age on any performers in their films appearing nude or performing sex acts. This requirement has been around for years. Legitimate production houses all have a Custodian of Records who keeps proof of age files on their performers. Requiring second, third, fourth, Nth-party suppliers to also retain these same records is what puts the hurt on.

Here's why the big companies aren't making the fuss that they should:

money


The new law means that a lot of porn which has no current or locatable records is now illegal. This means there's a market to make even more new porn which the big companies can make money off of ---- unlike all the old porn that can be located for free or discounted rates. It also puts a heavy burden on the Mom & Pop sites who may buy their content second or third hand and have no access to the original records.

The big companies see that with a little bit of effort they can comply with the new law and by not fighting the law they benefit from the elimination of a lot of competing product.

Additionally, if things were to get worse, the big companies have the means to incorporate and move their content to servers outside the country. You might be surprised at how many of the big companies are no longer listed as American businesses. Used to be everyone incorporated in Nevada for tax purposes. Now they incorporate in Canada or the Caymans or any other place where they can do business as they please without the heavy Right hand of the U.S. Government on their necks.


-B

Bingo. It's not a new law, and it won't eliminate internet porn any more than these laws originally eliminated other types of porn in print and on Video/DVD/CD. It will, however, affect sites like Lit in terms of the aforementioned photographs posted here, notably on the Amateur Pic board, because these photographs are (mostly) genuine amateur pics, meaning not of models with such records on file.

Before I go further:

Point one: The information does not have to be posted on public file, merely made available to the Attorney General should the information be requested.

Point two: The mom and pop sites will still be able to operate in the same manner as before, even (and it seems especially if) they buy these photographs second and third hand, simply because, the images cannot be passed to them without information as to where the records can be acquired being passed as well; meaning if I buy a photograph from another site, purchasing rights to use the photograph on my site, from say... Kara's, the larger site cannot sell those rights without also telling me where to have the Attorney General (should he/she request it) seek out the records.

...the statement required by this subsection shall include the name, title, and business address of the individual employed by such organization responsible for maintaining the records required...

Merely the location of said information is necessary according to this link.

Perhaps that link isn't entirely accurate, but I found it with a link from the site Brin linked to at the beginning of this thread...

Again, yes this will affect Lit, but Porn as we know it, in terms of professionally created smut, is safe so long as its producers are intelligent about keeping records.

Q_C

 

[dr_mabeuse]

It's another step up in the harrassment of the porn business is what it is.

They figure they can't ban porn in a head-to-head freedom-of-speech confrontation before the courts (not yet anyway), and so they're tightening the regulatory screws to make the porn providers sweat. Just the threat of an audit to determine compliance with these regulations will put a lot of people out of business. Who wants to be a hero and take on the US Government in court? Even if ACLU steps in on your side, the time and expense can kill you. Besides, ACLU's awfully busy with other matters right now.

We'll see what happens in the next few months, whether they bring suit against some sites as a warning to others. Remember, they don't even have to win the legal battle. Just the hassle of having to defend yourself in court is all it takes.