Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Bennett
They're not the law, but good luck trying to run a paysite when no one will process for it.
|
If I can upload photos of my cock to a fileshare host and get free hosting + 10 bucks per 1000 download, how is any payment processor going to stop that? They are not preventing it today and .xxx will only create more of those "business models".
Restricting access doesn't mean there will be less supply on black and shady markets. The distribution models will change and there will always be someone else there ready to serve and process as long there are money (and legal).
I'm against .xxx too but my main point is, that instead of opposing with what they can do to harm us, we should point out the flaws in their arguments. .xxx will not create less distribution, hide it from children or more control. Labeling a site would do the same job, so this is not about domain extension but money...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Bennett
Before getting over-confident about the rights one presumes to have, read up on "local community standards". There's far less freedom, even in the USA, than many realize.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_v._California
And furthermore, realize that the nexus of jurisdiction can be determined not only by where someone operates from, but also by where the visitor is accessing from. Read up on the legal action by the state of Kentucky to shut down / seizing domains of gambling sites that operated outside of Kentucky. |
Well, Im not sure if you mean out of the state or out of the country. Unless we are talking about international things like terrorism, copyright or child abuse, I doubt anyone in Europe or whatever is responsible for a foreigner visiting an adult website in another country if it's illegal in his homeland. .xxx doesn't ban pornography
