Quote:
Originally Posted by kane
You are correct in that there is more free porn now than ever before, but the amount of free porn was not the crux of the argument. The supreme court ruled back during the COPA trials that existing filtering software was adequate enough that those who wanted to block porn could be without infringing on the first amendment rights of others. In order for them to go back on that ruling there would have to be an argument made that those filters no longer work well enough. That would be a pretty difficult argument to make.
|
COPA was back in 1998? My point is that this is 2012 and tubes are delivering pornography by the fork lift to minors...
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/xhamster.com#
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/redtube.com#
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/youjizz.com#
Look at the age distribution of the members, now it does say 18-24 and alexa.com does not monitor minors but it is super obvious that plenty of minors are on the tubes, if this is the only argument to make then tubes are really sitting ducks...tubes have just started to gain momentum...they are sill young...give this crap a few more years tubes will be like 90% of internet traffic
I must say that the tubes will probably be the savior of porn...in their race to deliver as much free shit to anybody and their MASSIVE traffic they will litter the net with "gay ball suckers" and "shit in her mouth" clips...sitting ducks for politicians...any type of law passed to limit porn to membership sites would be the end of tubes...
Another thing I don't understand is how is limiting porn to membership sites infrigement on the first amendment? You don't have hard core pornography on TV or mainstream mags, its limited to pay=per view there is no free porn, without a password...how is the net different?