Hustler, Playboy and Penthouse have paved the way for a general acceptance of porn/sex in America. So has the advertising industry. You could purchase porn at the same convenience store where your wife bought milk and your kids bought a slurpee. Gambling (cash only lotto) and cigarets are also available in the same store. NOTE: this store is also very safe.

First amendment rights were fought for, won, and accepted. (thanks Mr. Flynt)

Now the internet is here and the "fringe" elements start to appear.

*Now when you go to purchase your Playboy you must pass a Japanese girl eating shit and receiving a sperm bath.
*Your wife has to push her way thru rape, facial abuse, and cock-gagging displays before reaching the milk section.
*Your kids are shown photos of double ass fucking and horse cocksucking photos while waiting for their slurpees.
*Anyone in the family can use the charge cards to run-up gambling debt, not losses, debt ... big difference.
*Stalkers, con artists, thieves hassle you as you exit the store.
*Welcome to the net.


Now honestly, defend this. Expect older members of government to defend this, yea right. Too many of us have lost touch with the outside world. We are insiders feeling picked on, singled out.

We are our own worst enemies. Look how GFY members react to tub-girl, goatsee, animals and getting ripped off on small traffic, design deals, or shaving. Now imagine regular families.

When you look at the content of Hustler/Playboy and how the new 2257 regulations read we are loosing ground. The sad fact is this content isn't really even about sex. It's about pushing limits, being different, getting a quick buck.

Imagine Hefner showing extreme movies at one of his parties. You can't.
The owners of these sites don't have the resources to defend their own product either. As we are prosecuted for technical violations of already legal content, we will be financing and fighting for their right to continually push limits long past most of my own.

Just my rambling thoughts ... I don't see a clean end to this ..... Lee

Webby, Live in Lexington, Kentucky ..... I will visit. For the arguing we have done about various topics, I DO understand your points about CR ... gotta go. :thumbsup

I keep telling you people that the US has the term Long arm of the law for a reason.

This is completely sick! If people want to buy and watch porn that's their business. Who has the arrogance to tell people what they should do with their lifes and force them to do so???!! I hate people like that. Yes, I fucking hate them! :2 cents:

Thank-you.... I think someone got the 'gist' of what I was saying.... So the fact that my company does billing for something that may be illegal in some market... should I be arrested and charged with a criminal offense?

The implications of this story are WAAAAY beyond DVD sales as it explicitly mentions streaming/webcam content etc...

Content that 'you' are producing/selling that is 'hard-core' is almost certainly beyond the R18 laws of the UK....

Fancy being arrested and sent down as you step off the plane?
Even better, when reciprocal extradition treaties are in place - perhaps you can be hauled out of your house for breaking UK laws?

Does it matter where in the world you are when you break a national law? - NO - It doesn't! You want to live by a naieve belief that you are beyond that countries' reach?

PS - rant NOT aimed at webby....

The keyword there is unclassified!

that's not good :(

The selling of cd's featuring "scat" the eating of human or animal shit is restricted to face-to-face transactions at approved adult stores. This makes sure adults only view it.

Is watching someone eat turds really porn?

hahahaha costs and budgets of uk courts is ridicufuckingless.

they are not aware of costs and budgets at all :2 cents:

its up to the fucking tax payer

i talk from experience here people

The first part of your post describes much the same as what happened in the EU (tho some countries were more liberal on their attitudes to porn - tho it was never thrust in your face).

There is something to be said for sticking your head above the trenches and being an "poineer", tho - only my :2 cents:, suspect that day is over where you can justifiably do that. Those where the absurd days when pubic hair was "illegal" :winkwink: We have come a long way since then.

Another bit on that topic - it's not a wonderful idea to push to boat out for money or getting an edge on competitors. If the intention is a considered one and where it can be justified to be for the overall good - ya want a strategy to go thru prob a few court cases and stay with your decisions till a law changes - not a smooth ride.

Agree - depending on the actual wording of laws, it prob would be hard for a defense advocate to explain to a jury how a "Japanese girl eating shit and receiving a sperm bath" was violating freedom of expression or the content had artist values or whatever defenses were allowed under the respective law. It's personal opinions, but find it hard to even see that are being erotic. (With a case like that - hell - I'd plea bargain ASAP :1orglaugh )

You are 100% correct in that we are our own worst enemies. Often a minority within the adult biz either have a desire to become more competitive in content display, or simply have no clue of acceptable guidelines. (It is easy as hell to become complacent when you see porn day in, day out - and "judgement" sometimes can be easier to fail.) The folks who do step out of line can be the most damaging to this industry.

On the flip side - we prob need to be "aware" of cases as they arise. Prosecutors, especially elected ones, could have a ambition tendencies towards fame and a tally sheet of convictions whether these are justified or not. Several countries layout the basis on which they may persue legal action - that's at least a good guideline to follow (Tho much of that is often not what we would consider to be in the adult biz as we know it.)

Only me, but I never saw much wrong with the original 2257 - it was "supposed" to ensure only adults played in the biz. It's a pity that law was rarely (never?) enforced - so much for child protection. Dunno what to say about the 2257 revamp - it's all been said already, - but it's clear that this is little more than enforced record-keeping with little focus on CP or protection.

Bottom line.. and OK, in some instances there are no published clear guidelines, in which case it has to be a personal opinion and possibly based on a legal opinion - but every webmaster or publisher of "adult content" needs to be fully aware of what he's publishing and what the overall effect this will have on the "average member of the public" - a possible jury.

I know and I'm sure you are well aware - some content, even from main sponsors, would stand no chance in hell of passing favorably with a jury in an obscenity trial. It's easy to slap up a few web pages - what you put on them can land ya in a jail cell unless there is *some* responsibility.

Having done that load of rambling - there's plenty to do in "adult" that does not go near that borderline area :thumbsup

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.