Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Pleasurepays
this is not to protect kids. this is to attack porn! people should not forget this. Bush promised he would do it... he never elaborated on how really. we all don't need to be attorneys to know that prosecuting obscenity is not easy in the US and an easier route is to simply create regulations that most cannot or will not comply with and then start taking people down.
|
Well PP - truth be known, I was well-aware of this and just waiting for the followup laws to get a clue of the final objective or where this path is ultimately leading :-)
There are loads of issues, apart from "child protection" and involve privacy, censorship and hell knows what else. When ya think of it, the US is currently under attact in many areas at the moment, and not by some terrorists, but by narrow-minded people with an agenda and often with very strong and arrogant religeous beliefs that they know better.
Equally... by appealing to that minority element, politicians can raise issues and abuse for their own benefit.
It is ironic that 2257 had primarily a valid purpose of child protection and is now being abused by a warped legislature - leaves a bad taste considering the numbers of child abuse issues within the US!!
Dunno... but I smell a hell of a lot of court cases stemming from this law... ranging from "rights violations" to "violations of international trade" to basic issues of assault on individuals (models) because their personal data was released under this law.
I won't be complying with this shit - but certainly be taking all reasonable measures to ensure any content does not feature minors. (what's new?)...