Quote:
Originally Posted by TORTOISE
|
Unfortunately I don't think this is good for the industry. Let me explain why.
First off I don't see anything illegal with these sites. Keep in mind I have not personally seen what was on them, nor do I intend to (it's fucking disgusting). I have just read the news stories and heard them say that there was no nudity or Lascivious exploitation of the genital or pubic area.
Now this makes me wonder how they could possibly prosecute this under cp.
Here is the definition of cp from 2256 from 2256
Quote:
(8) ?child pornography? means any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct, where?
(A) the production of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct;
(B) such visual depiction is a digital image, computer image, or computer-generated image that is, or is indistinguishable from, that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or
(C) such visual depiction has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct.
|
and here is what is defined as sexually explicit conduct
Quote:
(B) For purposes of subsection 8(B) [1] of this section, ?sexually explicit conduct? means?
(i) graphic sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex, or lascivious simulated sexual intercourse where the genitals, breast, or pubic area of any person is exhibited;
(ii) graphic or lascivious simulated;
(I) bestiality;
(II) masturbation; or
(III) sadistic or masochistic abuse; or
(iii) graphic or simulated lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person;
|
Everything in 2256 says that there has to be some sort of nudity or genital contact. After looking at the actual law (2256) I just don't see how this could be prosecuted as a cp case.
Now let me make it clear that I do not support this type of shit at all.
How should this be dealt with then if it shouldn't be prosecuted under 2256?
I have a few ideas.
First find out who is processing the payments for this site and blacklist them. Make a news story on the front page saying this company take payments for these "questionable sites" and I think the public will be outraged with that company (as they should be).
Next do the same thing with the company who hosts their sites.
Finally, I think that maybe someone should "pay a visit" to the person who runs/owns/operates/photographs for these sites and "convince them to stop".
I don't think this is a legal matter under the current laws.
I do however think that it is disgusting and needs to be stopped.
If this is prosecuted under 2256 I think this will mean stricter laws for people that produce legal porn. If they win this case the interpretation of 2256 will be severely broadened and might make it harder for honest people to produce honest porn. This means if you currently run a site that has no nudity at all you could be required to maintain 2257 docs. I think that is going a little too far.