GFY is not "real world" :1orglaugh

You are most welcome man and I'll keep you fully entertained and intoxicated :thumbsup

The reference was as to whether the DPP elected to proceed with an action - it was not about courts.

The DPP does consider the costs of legal action against the evidence he is presented with and the possibility of conviction. They don't have unlimited counsel to waste time on crap.

One classic example was a case I was involved in - not as a defendant, but involved so many offenses committed by one individual and with a fair amount of complexity in each, that the DPP elected not to proceed until such time law enforcement could cut down and isolate one or two issues (which was impossible!! :winkwink: ) to make it easier for a jury to understand.

As it was, the cost would have been $1.5 mill to proscute and they were not prepared to waste this on an idiot. (He was eventually convicted on a totally seperate issue not related to the mass offenses)

Your first para is sure correct TB - the implications of the BetOnSports case would suggest any webmaster who lands in whatever jurisdiction could be arrested for some offense in that area - tho he may not have any business, reside or have much else there.

In reality, and unless there is some high-profile issue, chances are 99% will never be considered for arrest for violation of some net offense.

The issue of eg DVD/videos shipped into the UK where these are not likely to have gone thru the ratings system is .... borderline. Chances are if all goes wrong, customs will simply confiscate the video and there will be no case to answer. It's highly unlikely C&E would waste their time on persuing the sender internationally - it not exactly an extraditable offense :winkwink:

BTW.. Shipments which are intercepted on some basis by customs are a matter which can be appealed. Got friends in the biz who did that - and one even ended up at the European Court of Justice on a defense of free trade where this case was awarded in their favor.

Which is very much the case and has been happening to porn imported from mainland Europe for many, many years i.e. before it was legal to purchase true hardcore via the R18 cert. at a sex shop (for a long time R18 was heavily censored too). With the advent of R18 being able to show most stuff it's even less likely to get confiscated at customs although still happens.

Other than that what's all the fuss about? This isn't the first guy prosecuted for stuff that would never even get an R18 and won't be the last. So far the authorities are fine with 'normal' hardcore in the UK, published on the Internet and it remains a grey area, to the benefit of UK adult webmasters. If you want to push it and start showing shit that's banned from sale anywhere here of course they'll go after you.

Use common sense and as it stands you'll be fine if in the UK i.e. don't promote anything that wouldn't pass the R18 certification and try to keep hardcore behind a members area or at the very least behind a warning page. Anything that gives you a small bit of extra defence should the worst happen is worthwhile. Mainly though, as with pushing porn in any country, don't make yourself a target. Scat is very much making yourself a target.

It still remains that nobody in the UK has been prosecuted for pushing normal (i.e. R18 ratable) porn on the Internet that I'm aware of.

Totally agree John :thumbsup Customs have a massive private collection of porn from Europe :)

There is nothing new in this - other than a conviction under OPA. Noticed there is a hell of a lot more "tolerance" (prob partly forced by involvement within the EU) - stuff that was "forbidden" years ago is no big deal now.

Sure.. agree with the allowances for "extra defence". Anything like that can be very useful in court and - as far as warning pages go (even tho these are never asked for under any law) - it's a more than reasonable thing to have.

Got some friends in the adult biz in the UK who have been operating over 30 years now. A lot has happened in that time, - including pushing the boat out - but they still have had no charges/convictions over that time - amazing considering it's part of the biz :)

Common sense and basic judgement go a long way :winkwink:

Ok - heres a 'stupid' question....

2 actually....


Is shitting on someone actually 'illegal' if it is with their consent??????

and it follows - if it isn't illegal to 'shit' on someone - then how does it become illegal to video it/sell it to someone that also consents...????????

****yeah it's pretty fucking distasteful - but hey - whatever floats your boat - and we aren't talkin snuff/rape movies here! (which obviously involve 'crime' - althought i'd also imagine the definition of rape varies greatly from nation to nation)

I get shit on all day long TB - can ya make it illegal please? :1orglaugh

OK.. The offense is obscenity. Is watching someone shitting on another obscene?? Hell.. I can think of better things to look at and prefer to avoid watching that stuff given any choice.

Forgetting the terms of the OPA - Would the "average member of the public" find this obscene? Prob more than not. It's basically below a commonly acceptable social behaviour.

To be honest - I don't understand "scat porn". It sure is not erotic and assume it's related to "degrading" others. The word "degrading" being the keyword which most likely activates a legal interest in prosecution.