Quote:
Originally posted by UnseenWorld
I'm not an attorney (I have to say that because the law is starting to get deep here), but let me introduce you to the concept of "patently obscene." What this means is that no jury's opinion is necessary. If you did it, then it's obscene and you're in deep doo-doo.
Scat, child porn, and bondage+sex are among the patently obscene categories.
|
I do not believe there is such a thing as a legal concept of "patently obscene" in most US jurisdictions. Child porn is per se illegal whether it's obscene or not, but everything else requires a jury to determine whether it violates community standards. (Murky & dangerous part is the who/what/where questions surrounding that test.)
All the received rules of thumb (no bondage plus sex, no scat, no animals, etc.) are somewhat stale distillations of good legal guesswork regarding what was likely to trigger successful obscenity prosecutions during the Reagan administration. Except in LA and a couple of bible belt states, there haven't been many non-kiddie obscenity cases in quite a while, although Asshahahahaha threatens periodically to bring them back.
The gallery in question looks a lot like the content in Hustler's Taboo Magazine, and Larry has good lawyers these days. It's edgy, it's far from safe, but it's a ways from sure-thing illegal.
Plus of course the webmaster may not even be subject to the jurisdiction of courts in the US. Sometimes globalization is your friend!