Thank you Laura and others (not a facetious thread)

[rambling man]

Thank you for being so thorough about the rule about minors in stories. It's not just covering your asses but everyone on this board. I know you all catch hell about it from some, but after what happened in Texas, I know a lot of us are thankful for your diligence.

 

[Ambrosious]

Who's Laura?

 

[rambling man]

Meant Laurel but was still waking up..drove 12 hours yesterday to Virginia and back

 

[Doulton]

What happened in Texas?

 

[rambling man]

a whole mess of people who subscribed to a site that had child porn on it were rounded up by the authorities...i dont think theyd go after a site with just stories, but you never know. I'm just thankful it's nothing we have to worry about.

 

[GuyJD]

THAT'S FOR DAMN SURE, RAMBLING

I just heard on the national news that a couple were recently arrested for running a kiddie porn website. The media showed what was left of their office. All of the computers and phones were taken from the office by the FBI. But the fun part of the story is that their records show that there are over 300,000 subscribers to their website and more than 100,000 will be busted before the month is up.
With my love for writing, God knows that I would hate to be busted for writing such stories.

 

[Laurel]

What I read is that there were over 250,000 subscribers to some AVS service that the couple owned. Apparently, the AVS service didn't have child porn. The child porn was on 5 sites that they tried to sell memberships to through the AVS.

That is to say, they had a legal operation with 250,000 members. They then used THAT list to try to sell people their illegal junk. Only the people who actually bought the child porn will be busted. That number, from what I read, has yet to be released. Apparently, MSNBC had initially erroneous reported that 250,000 people subscribed to the child porn sites. As usual, the media goes for the big story rather than the accurate one.

We've talked to a lawyer about the issue of stories and underage characters, and we believe that the First Amendment fully protects fictitious written work, regardless of its content. That being said, we still personally intend to maintain the 18+ rule for Literotica as we have since we started the site. Thanks for the input and support, as usual.

- Laura

 

[rambling man]

sorry about the name....as for the protection..in a place where the law means what the last judge decided it means you cannot be too careful..thanks!

 

[Laurel]

No kidding!

 

[Guru]

 

[KillerMuffin]

http://www.reuters.com/news_article.jhtml?type=internetnews&StoryID=151803

Straight from the Reuter's mouth:


By James Vicini

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. officials said on Wednesday they had dismantled "the largest known commercial child pornography enterprise" ever, with 100 arrests over two years after an undercover investigation of a Texas company that distributed child pornography over the Internet.

They said the two-year investigation, called "Operation Avalanche," began in early 1999 with the discovery of a company called "Landslide Productions Inc." in Fort Worth, Texas.

It took in as much as $1.4 million a month, with most of the money coming from subscriptions to child pornography sites on the World Wide Web, the authorities said.

The couple who owned and operated the company were sentenced in federal court on Monday, with the husband getting life in prison and the wife getting 14 years.

Investigators targeted subscribers in the United States who expressed a desire to get child pornography or to have sex with children, and then sent them videotapes, CD-ROMs or floppy disks containing the material, they said.

"Today's Internet has also become the new marketplace for child pornography," Attorney General John Ashcroft told a news conference at U.S. Postal Service headquarters to announce the end of the investigation.

Most of the child pornography on the web sites came from overseas, officials said.

Five international webmasters, from Russia and Indonesia, also have been charged, but they have yet to be found and brought to trial in the United States, the officials said.

Chief Postal Inspector Kenneth Weaver said nearly $100,000 was transferred to one webmaster for just one month's business.

"It may be the tip of the iceberg," Weaver said, but he added the results send the message that child pornography will be "taken very seriously."

Authorities were unable to say how many children were involved or to identify most of the children. But they did learn from a British detective the identities of a six-year-old boy and his eight-year-old sister from that country, with the pictures taken by their stepfather.

Asked why only 100 out of the approximately 250,000 subscribers had been arrested, officials said the vast majority of them were in foreign nations and beyond U.S. jurisdiction.

They said they focused only on those interested in child, not adult, pornography.

The couple who ran the enterprise, Thomas and Janice Reedy, were charged and convicted last year. Of the 100 individuals arrested, one has committed suicide while a 36-year-old North Carolina computer consultant was found to have been videotaping young girls and was sentenced to 17-1/2 years in prison.

Asked whether authorities took over the web site after the arrest of the Reedys and operated it, making controlled sales of child pornography to subscribers, Ray Smith of the Postal Service declined to comment on specifics of the operation, saying he did not want "to compromise future investigations."

 

[Mustang Sally]

I read a court judgment at work the other day that made me think of all the Literotica authors (and editors!).

It was about a man who'd written a lengthy, graphic piece of fiction called "Making My Daughter Mine - and Everyone Else's". The daughter was twelve or thirteen, if I remember correctly. He also had an extensive collection of kiddie porn pics on his computer.

He was charged with possession of child pornography for both the story and the pics, and also with possession with intent to distribute for the story, because he'd written a "from the author" note that made it clear he was going to submit it to a story site.

The jury ruled "not guilty" on the intent to distribute charge.

(The really horrible thing is that his computer was inspected as part of an investigation of child abuse. The story was about his own daughter, using her real name, age and description.)