View Single Post
Old 07-31-2004, 04:18 AM  
Mutt
Too lazy to set a custom title
 
Mutt's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 34,431
Quote:
Originally posted by a1ka1ine
hmm i thought you would do as although they are nonnude the sites are clearly sexual in nature, and a girl spreading her legs with the camera zoomed in on her underwear would probably require 2257. i hope it would, because otherwise that would make it totally legal for a site of someone underage to exist that was nonnude - so, surely 2257 applies
interesting - i was just telling somebody yesterday that many of the shots on nn sites are far more nasty than a softcore totally nude glamour shoot - funny how a little piece of white cotton fabric changes things for alot of people. reminds me of the teenage girls these days i read about who are engaging in anal sex and still consider themselves 'virgins' .

Sexual in nature isn't a term in the 2257 law. 'Sexually explicit' is what it says. I really don't think most nn sites fall under 2257 - if there is simulated or real masturbation, yes, if her hand is down her panties and she appears to be playing with herself then that definitely falls under 2257 requirements, panties or no panties.
Mutt is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote