I'm surprised I dont see 100000 threads about it.
-
-
what ruling?? you mean Cmodels?? knox decision or something new?? i missed it
ICQ 293125596 -
I didn't see it. What's up?Sleep well, and dream of large women.
Comment
-
-
-
NN site owners can't play online poker anymore?
Comment
-
Comment
-
thanks for the link, reading...Comment
-
Fuck non nudes anyway.All of my adult ventures have failed.Comment
-
thats a good thing. if they'ra making a site with half naked underage girls for the purpose of people jerking off to it, it should be illegal.I host with VacaresComment
-
Here's a nice flawed argument:
So not only the legality, but also the definition of pornography changes according to the subjects involved? That's bizarre...Assistant U.S. District Attorney Karin Fojtik said Congress made it clear that nudity does not have to be present to consider something pornographic.
“The big difference is these are children,” Fojtik said.
I don't like those NN sites, but this decision just doesn't seem to make sense.
If that's kiddy porn, then magazines like Maxim and FHM are "normal porn". So are most movies, for that matter, and television series.According to charging documents, one photo of a 9-year-old girl shows her dressed in “black stiletto pumps, a black lace thong, black bra, and black jacket” sitting on a dining room table./(bb|[^b]{2})/Comment
-
i was right
might not be the knox decision i saw someplace else, but same thing....
love the banner under the article:
[IMG]http://www.********.com/images/banners/PaidSponsors/MaxHardcore.jpg[/IMG]
ICQ 293125596Comment
-
I have never seen one of these "NN Kids" sites. Guess if your not looking for them. They should be banned anyways
Comment
-
Another stupid ruling in the US that opens the door to more prosecutions. The correct way of dealing with this would be to pass an appropriate law.. but of course that would be too close to common sense to ever be an option.Comment
-
the guy is a lowlife for posing girls that young in sexy outfits and poses but the ruling sounds really bad - mainstream entertainment has been sexualizing underage actresses and singers forever - the law should be applied equally to everybody - if this guy is guilty then so are the record companies who create the images of the teenie bopper divas. i assume this judge would say that there is artistic worth to the mainstream stuff but what about the mainstream modeling industry where girls are 15 and modeling half naked?I moved my sites to Vacares Hosting. I've saved money, my hair is thicker, lost some weight too! Thanks Sly!Comment
-
i hate sites that exploit children that way, but being sexy is NOT pornographic and it seems like what that decision does is widen the definition of pornography. if this definition of pornography stands, women won't be able to wear their regular nightclub attire in public and magazines showing lingerie will be defined as pornographic.Got Gay and For Women Traffic?
Comment
-
Originally posted by MuttThose two posts about sum it up.Originally posted by Tempest
The law needs to be applied equally to everyone. If current laws don't seem to deliver justice, either new ones need to be made or old ones need to be changed.
We all have gut feelings about sites like these, but judges need to follow the laws, not their guts./(bb|[^b]{2})/Comment
-
Comment
-
Figures that this would be coming out of Utah. I understand they are trying to shut down the "teen modeling" paysites, but I don't think they can do it without sweeping innocent photos up into this also. As it is, families are having their kids taken away while authorities investigate a bathtub photo they dropped off at the developer.
If the new standard is that nudity isn't required for CP, then families who take photos of their kids in their underwear could be investigated also.
And another thing... If provacative clothing can be considered CP, then it's time to arrest anyone involved with those child modeling fashion shows. The organizers and the parents who dress their little girls up to look like whores.Comment
-
wtf it's common sense. just don't have little 10 year old girls on your website, regardless if it's porn or not. just steer clear of young ass girls completely and you shouldn't have anything to worry about...Comment
-
www.SexyGirlsCash.com
CONTACT // FITZMULTI AT GMAIL.COM //
{Please include a message so I know you are from GFY! I get too many spam "add requests"!}Comment
-
So what about sites selling clothes, including underwear, for young girls? What about the homepage of a gymnastics team? What about a family's vacation photos on the beach? What about girls posting vids of themselves dancing in underwear on youtube?
The NN sites need to be taken care of, certainly, but only through actual, specific, clear laws./(bb|[^b]{2})/Comment
Comment