Originally Posted by Ron Bennett

Ah yes, the "local community standards" trap that can trip up even the most cautious webmasters - truth is that most any adult website, no matter how tame it seems to many of us, is likely in violation of "local community standards" somewhere in the U.S.

Many adult websites work to minimize such risk by disallowing signups from certain areas and/or hiding behind a bunch of shell companies that are basically shadows too expensive / hassle to traceback...

Fortunately for most adult business folks, the authorities tend to target the very, very low fruit (often there's some warning; foreshadowing of trouble) - in this instance, the authorities went after a company that shipped physical product to what's likely considered a "problem" zipcode by many in the business.

In the view of many, obscenity laws go against the 1st amendment (some scholars debate otherwise in it doesn't preclude local govts enacting limits) ... but regardless, such restrictions definitely go against the spirit of freedom of speech and expression in general; violation of basic human rights of legal consenting adults to live their lives free of draconian restrictions on activities that aren't hurting others.

With all that said, the jury's ruling is somewhat bizarre, since bukakke is considered very obscene by many far more than cocksucking.

Ron