forced closure of UK adult website

[LAJ]

This could be important... ATVOD is seeking an expansion of its authority to cover websites based outside the UK...


Regulatory First: ATVOD Forces Closure of UK Adult Website

LONDON ? For the first time since its formation in March 2010, the Authority for Television on Demand has barred an adult website from providing online video-on-demand services and forced the site?s host to suspend service to the site.

ATVOD is a non-governmental entity empowered by the UK government?s official communications regulator, the Office of Communications, to ensure television and online broadcasters comply with all statutory and regulatory requirements. The agency?s powers are fairly broad, including not only the ability to determine what constitutes an on-demand broadcast, but also the authority to enforce broadcast laws under Ofcom oversight. On-demand services that defy ATVOD orders are subject to criminal prosecution.


MORE- http://www.ynoteurope.com/regulatory...adult-website/

[Harmon]

1 They allowed any visitor free, unrestricted access to hardcore pornographic video promotions and/or trailers or still images featuring real sex or masturbation in explicit detail.
2 Access to the videos was open to any visitor who paid a fee. As the services accepted payment methods ? such as debit cards ? which can be used by consumers younger than 18, ATVOD ruled that each service had failed to put in place effective access controls.

Wow, but they do have a point. You can get a debit card under the age of 18.

?Our enforcement activity over the past two years has sent a clear message that UK providers of hardcore pornography on demand must take effective steps to ensure that such material is not accessible to under-18s,? he added. ?Asking visitors to a website to click an ?I am 18? button or enter a date of birth or use a debit card is not sufficient. If they are going to offer explicit sex material, they must know that their customers are 18, just as they would in the offline world.?

Setting precedent ... this may not be such a bad thing if you think about it

[Qbert]

OK, so does that mean that CCBill, and others processing adult transactions, have blocked the use of debit cards for UK based sites?

[Elli]

Originally Posted by Qbert

OK, so does that mean that CCBill, and others processing adult transactions, have blocked the use of debit cards for UK based sites?

Most excellent question.

[Rochard]

I am so glad I didn't buy a xxx domain.

[EddyTheDog]

Originally Posted by Elli

Most excellent question.

I think that is where it is going - It would cut UK revenue by a large % - At a guess more than 75%...

[baddog]

Originally Posted by Rochard

I am so glad I didn't buy a xxx domain.

I have to ask what difference that would make in this case.

[whOaKemosabe]

Originally Posted by baddog

I have to ask what difference that would make in this case.

here companys xxx ceo and president baddog

[EddyTheDog]

Originally Posted by baddog

I have to ask what difference that would make in this case.

I am not sure either - Is there something about XXX that I hadn't heard about?..

[Harmon]

Originally Posted by whOaKemosabe

here companys xxx ceo and president baddog

Did you even attend school, Chris? Is it possible to speak in complete and coherent sentences?

You continue to make your "people" look bad.

[baddog]

Originally Posted by EddyTheDog

I am not sure either - Is there something about XXX that I hadn't heard about?..

Besides that, I can't imagine a UK action would affect Rockhard in California.

[TumblrPRO]

That Cameron is truly a NAZI, just sayin...

[DVTimes]

http://www.xbiz.com/news/171423

ATVOD for the first time has used its powers to suspend an online adult website under the U.K.’s Communications Act.

JP Media, operators of JessicaPressley.com, was ordered barred indefinitely from operating the website after ATVOD and parent communications agency Ofcom said that the website company failed to keep explicit videos or images beyond the reach of children.

ATVOD, U.K.’s video-on-demand regulator, says operators of JP Media face criminal prosecution if they deny the order, but as of Saturday morning the six-year-old site was inoperable. JessicaPressley operated as the official website for the U.K.-based porn star.

A second porn site, PleasuringHerself.com, also now closed, was subject of recent enforcement action by ATVOD, as well. The site offered short clips, with some titled “All She Needs Is a Vibrator” and “Pushing Her Vibrator in Deep.”

ATVOD said that JessicaPressley.com and PleasuringHerself.com both operated from the U.K. and provided free-to-view R18-equivalent porn content. They both did not have a robust paywall for premium content in defiance of Section 368K(3)(a) of the Communications Act of 2003, the regulator said.

JessicaPressley.com was ordered suspended on Oct. 7 by Ofcom, but the site was closed the next day and is no longer available. ATVOD said that JP Media did not comply with the regulator and was closed only after ATVOD asked Ofcom to impose a statutory penalty.

PleasuringHerself.com closed in late August after ATVOD reached an enforcement notification over the site.

“The services each broke the statutory rules in two ways,” ATVOD said in a statement late Friday. “Firstly, they allowed any visitor free, unrestricted access to hardcore pornographic video promos/trailers or still images featuring real sex or masturbation in explicit detail. Secondly, access to the full videos was open to any visitor who paid a fee. As the services accepted payment methods — such as debit cards – which can be used by under 18s ATVOD ruled that each service had also failed to put in place effective access controls in relation to the full videos.”

Pete Johnson, who leads ATVOD as its chief executive, said that the agency’s enforcement activity over the past two years “has sent a clear message that U.K. providers of hardcore pornography on demand must take effective steps to ensure that such material is not accessible to under-18s.”

“The action taken in relation to the provider of Jessica Pressley service is the first of its kind and demonstrates that the ATVOD rules that apply to U.K. VOD services are backed by effective enforcement procedures,” he said. “We will continue to take robust action to ensure that U.K. operators of regulated VOD services comply with rules designed to protect children from harmful content, but we are not complacent and will continue to monitor relevant services and act as required.”

[DVTimes]

http://www.xbiz.com/news/171456

Jerry Barnett, who leads SexAndCensorship.org, the U.K.-based free speech and sexual freedom group, says that anomalies in an upcoming ATVOD conference lineup have led to questions as to whether the event is about child protection or Internet censorship.

Barnett today published online an open letter to ATVOD board member Julia Hornle complaining that several speakers to be featured at the Dec. 12 London conference, titled “For Adults Only? — Protecting Children From Online Porn," could skew the conversation.

In addition, Barnett said that there are a number of potential speakers that have been left out of the lineup.

Barnett pointed his concern with two speakers who have been chosen for the conference: Paula Hall and Julia Long.

He said that the inclusion of those two speakers is inappropriate because their "beliefs seem out of place at a conference dedicated to child protection."

"Paula Hall is billed as chair of the Association for the Treatment of Sex Addiction and Compulsivity. However, there is widespread skepticism among mental health professionals that 'sex addiction' is even a genuine condition, or whether it simply stigmatizes normal sexual response," Barnett said.

"It is worrying that you consider what many believe to be quack psychiatry to be relevant to this discussion."

Long, a spokeswoman for the morality group Object, campaigns against all forms of sexual expression, whether consumed by children or adults, Barnett said.

"Object frequently attempt to link adult material to sexual violence, although they have no evidence to back this point of view. They have claimed — without evidential foundation — that adults are harmed by accessing pornography, reading lads mags and visiting strip clubs."

Barnett on Monday told XBIZ that the fact that ATVOD chose to invite Hall and Long as speakers to a child protection conference "casts serious doubt over the aims of this event."

Barnett in the letter said that there are a number of suitable individuals who should be considered for the conference, including Dr. Guy Cumberbatch, pychologist who has been commissioned previously by Ofcom to conduct research on child protection.

He noted others, as well, including Dr. Clarissa Smith, a professor of sexual cultures at Sunderland University, and Sharon Girling, a former police official who is a leading authority on online child abuse imagery in the U.K.

Speakers already slated for the event include Sue Berelowitz, deputy children’s commissioner for England; Alexandra Birtles, head of external communications at TalkTalk; John Carr of the Children’s Charities’ Coalition on Internet Safety; Reg Bailey, CEO of The Mothers’ Union; Vicki Shotbolt, CEO of The Parent Zone; Diane Duke, CEO of the Free Speech Coalition; and the ASACP's Vince Charlton.

Barnett, in the letter, said he hopes that ATVOD will respond to the requests to "put minds at rest regarding your goals in setting up the conference panel."

The conference is being built around two panel-led sessions. According to Pete Johnson, who leads ATVOD as chief executive, the first will consider the nature of the problem, addressing questions such as: What is the nature of the content? How easy is it for children to access? What is known about the scale of children’s exposure? What risks does it pose to children? The second session will consider possible solutions, addressing questions such as: Are media education and parental control software sufficient? What else is being done? What more could be done and by whom?

The event, chaired by Channel 4 News social affairs editor Jackie Long , will be held at the Lincoln's Inn Fields, London WC2, on Dec. 12 from 4 p.m.-7:30 p.m., followed by a reception.

[DVTimes]

atvod suck ass

[RyuLion]

oh wow.....

[kadudu]

So wait, what measures do webmasters have to take to ensure that they won't face this problem? I mean aside from plastering over the splash page and putting in the terms of use that the website has adult content and it's illegal for minors to view it, what else can you do? Do you guys think this will be a problem in the USA soon?

Thinking maybe I should put a check box on the signup page with 'I certify that I am of legal age to view adult content' or something like that.

[DVTimes]

Originally Posted by kadudu

So wait, what measures do webmasters have to take to ensure that they won't face this problem? I mean aside from plastering over the splash page and putting in the terms of use that the website has adult content and it's illegal for minors to view it, what else can you do? Do you guys think this will be a problem in the USA soon?

Thinking maybe I should put a check box on the signup page with 'I certify that I am of legal age to view adult content' or something like that.

The simple solution is to have a pic only site. If you have no vids then atvod have (as yet) no powers over you.

By the way they plan to go after non uk sites too:

http://www.digitaltveurope.net/10414...payment-rules/

[DVTimes]

Old, but worth reading:

ATVOD Seeks to Block Payments to Non-U.K. Hardcore Porn Sites

http://www.xbiz.com/news/164203

ATVOD's chief executive says he's in discussions with processors about blocking payments to non-U.K. websites that offer hardcore porn.

Peter Johnson, who leads the British regulator of video-on-content, said that websites that offer hardcore porn outside of restricted sections, without rigorous age-verification barriers, could be violation of the U.K.'s Obscene Publications Act and be operating illegally in the country.

"If you're offering [hardcore porn] in your shop window, you're breaking U.K. law," he said on Friday at the Westminster eForum conference. "Even if you're not in the U.K., you're breaking U.K. law because our children can access it.

"Therefore your shop is trading illegally. Therefore funds should not be flowing from the U.K. to your shop, because your shop is fundamentally operating in an unlawful capacity."

Johnson mentioned one porn site as a target — Manwin's PornHub.com — according to Wired.

PornHub, Johnson said, offers hardcore pornographic content freely without age-verification barriers, including credit card, passport or driving license checks.

"The free stuff is the shop window," he said, referring to PornHub's opening web page.

Johnson has the law on his side with a 2000 British appeals court decision that held that if content held on U.S. servers is viewed in the U.K., that content becomes subject to U.K. law.

The appeals court, in its decision, said "the content of American websites could come under British jurisdiction when downloaded in the U.K."

One possible tool for blocking payments could be the creation of a blacklist of non-U.K. companies that were judged to be operating unlawfully, he said.

"It's an early stage, but we're working with the U.K. Cards Association and major companies who are involved in processing payments from U.K. bank accounts to online services," Johnson said. "We're getting more and more support for everyone to sit down together to discuss matters of common interest."

The U.K. Cards Association, Wired reported, has been in touch with Johnson over the issue. The trade group comprises of members Barclays, Capital One, American Express and WorldPay.

"Representatives of the U.K. Cards Association have met officers of ATVOD, with a view to supporting their work to restrict adult images online to children using the Internet," a U.K. Cards Association spokesperson told Wired. "We have agreed to play a role in linking up ATVOD with other organizations concerned with the operation of card payments."

[DVTimes]

ATVOD Begins Talks With U.K. Processors Over Foreign Porn Sites

http://www.xbiz.com/news/170004

The top U.K. processors on Monday said that last week's summit hosted by U.K. video-on-demand regulator ATVOD provided a "starting point" discussion on a plan that could effectively block revenue generated by foreign hardcore porn sites.

ATVOD in its latest initiative is seeking a voluntary deal with banks and credit card firms to tackle hardcore sites that don’t employ age verification.

But the group of processors at the meeting — the British Bankers’ Association, MasterCard, Payments Council, PayPal, The UK Cards Association and Visa Europe — summed up that they don't want to be "the regulator of the open Internet."

Nevertheless, the processors said that that they have agreed to work with ATVOD to consider how any proposal to limit the exposure to explicit porn images might work in practice should new laws become enacted.

"The view of the meeting was that the current legal framework provides inadequate provision for this to happen and any emerging initiatives will need a firmer statutory underpinning," the processors group said.

Noting that they already work with law enforcement agencies, the processors said there is "no single solution" over what to do over the proliferation of free porn and that ATVOD's meeting was a "useful starting point."

"It is clearly a global issue and any initiatives have to recognize that most of the websites in question are hosted outside the U.K. and that such online material is often available free of charge," the processors said. "The industry will work with [ATVOD] to develop proposals that will make it more difficult for payments to be made to online services which allow children to access explicit pornographic material.

"The industry, alongside ATVOD, is therefore keen to explore this with government," the processors said. "In the meantime, we have agreed to work with ATVOD to consider how any proposal might work in practice, should the necessary statutory underpinning come into being."

ATVOD CEO Peter Johnson told XBIZ on Monday that the regulator viewed the meeting as " positive and constructive" but did not elaborate further on the meeting, which was not open to the public.

Johnson announced earlier this year that some websites that market to U.K. consumers could have funds blocked by banks and credit card companies if their operators fail to stop children accessing the sites.

He has noted that recent enforcement activity has sent a clear message that U.K. providers of VOD hardcore porn must take effective steps to ensure that such material is not accessible to under-18s.

With the latest ATVOD initiative, foreign porn sites would be subject to some form of regulation by the processors.

U.K. officials this past summer have hinted that they will prepare legislation if the processors don't agree on some form of regulation for non-U.K. porn sites that don't employ age verification.

ATVOD's initiative to regulate foreign porn is just one of the battles facing online adult entertainment.

Last summer, Prime Minister David Cameron announced an opt-in system under which households would be denied sexually explicit online material unless they specifically asked for such access.

Cameron this month will hear testimony from companies including Google and Yahoo to demand to know how they have progressed since July, when he demanded that they block explicit web searches.

[lyno]

A UK waterboarding porn site, that would be funny.

[Best-In-BC]

Its fucking crazy that they wanna watch us as analy as possible

[potter]

Uhm... So if there are laws in the UK to what VOD tv/websites need to do to be legal/compliant, then follow the fucking rules.

I'm sure most legit businesses that want to start a VOD service in the UK, first go "Ok, what laws are there governing VOD services and what do I have to do to be compliant". You know, because they actually think first and want to own a business. They're not just some kid in their parents basement saying "I'm starting a website and not following any laws I'm flying by the seat of my pants, weeeeee, I have teh biznusses, CEO basment kid".

[Mediamix]

This serious thread needs a picture..

[DVTimes]

bump for the thread

[AHarper]

Seems UK is going a similar way as germany already goes for years

[JFK]

Originally Posted by AHarper

Seems UK is going a similar way as germany already goes for years

seems like it

[bean-aid]

Originally Posted by pornopete

You fail to see how this is actually good news. Actually very good news.

1) It will keep porn away from minors.
2) It will force companies online to verify that the viewer is of legal age, in other words use their credit card.

This would mean that any website displaying pornographic material that can be easily accessed by minors will be shut down, ie tube sites. Not only would this movement shut down tube sites it will force surfers to use their credit cards.

Age verification then 1 click sales = $

[Grisey]

[QUOTE=pornopete;19900114]You fail to see how this is actually good news. Actually very good news.

Originally Posted by pornopete

1) It will keep porn away from minors.

No it won't, there is tubes still in play, the safest way is for parents to block/managed there kids access on the internet

Originally Posted by pornopete

2) It will force companies online to verify that the viewer is of legal age, in other words use their credit card.

But that's stops anyone 18+ using a debit card, surely the safer way would be for the banks to block debit cards for anyone under 18 making payments via ccbill/epoch/netbill etc etc etc

Job done, there card would just decline. they haven't joined a porn site.

AVTOD doesn't need to exist, if they went down the banks route...so now its set up as a cash cow in fines.

They went after Manwin for a $160k fine for Playboy TV

Originally Posted by pornopete

This would mean that any website displaying pornographic material that can be easily accessed by minors will be shut down, ie tube sites. Not only would this movement shut down tube sites it will force surfers to use their credit cards.

Tubes aren't going anywhere.

[Jel]

Originally Posted by Grisey

...

what's your email addy?

[AHarper]

Originally Posted by Grisey

No it won't, there is tubes still in play, the safest way is for parents to block/managed there kids access on the internet

I agree. Tubes will ever find a way to exist. And it seems they are fighting with the smaller companies like small/medium paysite owners. Fighting with the big guys seems not to be so easy.

Additionally: This is the beginning of censorship of the internet. The next country will take it as an example and ban porn in general. The next one goes the same way and so on.

[Jel]

I don't think the US/UK/CAN/AUS/etc want to 'ban' porn per se, but anyone who thinks you can serve up the kind of porn readily available to *anyone* with an internet connection, including 14 year old kids, 24/7, and there be no repercussion is seriously demented.

[pornmasta]

So they shut down a pay site, but you can still access youporn ???
right ?

[pornmasta]

btw what is porn in the UK ?
Do people approve censorship there ?

[Bourke]

what is demented is thinking it is anyone other than a parents role to parent children. Would I want my kids exposed to really nasty, degrading, gonzo porn at an early age? no. Will I leave it up to the govt to make sure my kids dont see it? of course not. That's MY role as a parent.
People need to take personal responsibility for their own lives. This big brother knows best thinking is bullshit. Especially the govt. Governments fuck up damn near everything they touch, they are riddled with bias, interest groups and fucking discussion panels. Is that how we want to decide what our kids can and cannot do? No hardcore porn for kids, fair enough. But how quickly does it become the govt taking your kids off you because you did not feed them the govt mandated diet? or teach them the govt mandated religion? How long til they decide football is too rough and everyone has to play badminton?

[pornmasta]

badminton can be violent, you need a paper from your physician if you want to be allowed to play it.

(note: here you need already a paper from your physician to be allowed to run at some low level sport events)

[SplatterMaster]

Originally Posted by Bourke

what is demented is thinking it is anyone other than a parents role to parent children. Would I want my kids exposed to really nasty, degrading, gonzo porn at an early age? no. Will I leave it up to the govt to make sure my kids dont see it? of course not. That's MY role as a parent.

Parents can?t police their children 24/7. That?s why you have other type rules in place such as alcohol and cigarette rules. Same applies here. Of course it?s up to parents to teach their children. But children are going to want to break the rules. Just handing something to them is irresponsible of all society. Might as well give them beer and liquor when their parents aren?t looking.

[iwantchixx]

Originally Posted by Harmon

1 They allowed any visitor free, unrestricted access to hardcore pornographic video promotions and/or trailers or still images featuring real sex or masturbation in explicit detail.
2 Access to the videos was open to any visitor who paid a fee. As the services accepted payment methods ? such as debit cards ? which can be used by consumers younger than 18, ATVOD ruled that each service had failed to put in place effective access controls.

Wow, but they do have a point. You can get a debit card under the age of 18.

?Our enforcement activity over the past two years has sent a clear message that UK providers of hardcore pornography on demand must take effective steps to ensure that such material is not accessible to under-18s,? he added. ?Asking visitors to a website to click an ?I am 18? button or enter a date of birth or use a debit card is not sufficient. If they are going to offer explicit sex material, they must know that their customers are 18, just as they would in the offline world.?

Setting precedent ... this may not be such a bad thing if you think about it

For once, I agree with you.

[Jel]

Originally Posted by Bourke

what is demented is thinking it is anyone other than a parents role to parent children. Would I want my kids exposed to really nasty, degrading, gonzo porn at an early age? no. Will I leave it up to the govt to make sure my kids dont see it? of course not. That's MY role as a parent.
People need to take personal responsibility for their own lives. This big brother knows best thinking is bullshit. Especially the govt. Governments fuck up damn near everything they touch, they are riddled with bias, interest groups and fucking discussion panels. Is that how we want to decide what our kids can and cannot do? No hardcore porn for kids, fair enough. But how quickly does it become the govt taking your kids off you because you did not feed them the govt mandated diet? or teach them the govt mandated religion? How long til they decide football is too rough and everyone has to play badminton?

yeah that's great, but the fact is, almost every single thing governments do to 'help' us, is down to the idiot few having to be catered for/to. That's how it's always been, and always will be. Doesn't matter what you, I, or anyone else thinks, we all know that's how it is, and thinking that it's going to be any different just because some of us believe in personal responsibilty is going to change nothing - various govt's are going to come down hard on tubes sooner or later.

I have no doubt that manwin can't wait for that day (and that it also has been part of surely the most brilliantly executed marketing plan since rockefeller) - that huge market share they have is going to at some stage, be 'forced' for want of a far better word, to upgrade to premium membership yaddayadda to get their fix of tube porn.

[Grisey]

Originally Posted by Jel

what's your email addy?

Pmed you

[Grisey]

Originally Posted by SplatterMaster

Parents can?t police their children 24/7. That?s why you have other type rules in place such as alcohol and cigarette rules. Same applies here. Of course it?s up to parents to teach their children. But children are going to want to break the rules. Just handing something to them is irresponsible of all society. Might as well give them beer and liquor when their parents aren?t looking.

Its not about policing you're kids 24/7 its about there internet access, its got fuck all to do with cigs and booze, both of these are addictive substances.

Its about managing you're kids access to the internet, the right way to do it.

[Grisey]

Originally Posted by pornmasta

So they shut down a pay site, but you can still access youporn ???
right ?

Yes.... so its pointless they are doing fuck all to make an impact... other then force more people to the tubes.

[The Porn Nerd]

Two points, one practical, one marketing ($$$$):

1. The ONLY way to reduce (not prevent) minors from seeing online porn so readily is to force every adult website to be a paysite, even for $0.01, to be used as Age Verification. Meaning, when you hit a tour - be it tube, paysite, VOD, cam site, TGP, WHATever - you have to enter a credit card to see any of the good stuff. This would make ads on sites illegal, too (unless they were softcore/tease).

Bottom line: you wanna see "porn" then you gotta pay and get through the Age Verification firewall, period. ANY website not doing this will be shut down immediately. That IS (currently) the only way to accomplish a reduction (not total prevention) of free access to porn.

Now, here's the Best Part people:

2. Making porn LESS ACCESSIBLE equals more money. Cha-motherfucking-CHING. Make it HARDER to get your porn fix and you will pay for it. So we, as adult webmasters, affiliates, performers and all the rest, WE win, because we will make BANK if porn is harder to access.

[AHarper]

Originally Posted by The Porn Nerd

Two points, one practical, one marketing ($$$$):

1. The ONLY way to reduce (not prevent) minors from seeing online porn so readily is to force every adult website to be a paysite, even for $0.01, to be used as Age Verification. Meaning, when you hit a tour - be it tube, paysite, VOD, cam site, TGP, WHATever - you have to enter a credit card to see any of the good stuff. This would make ads on sites illegal, too (unless they were softcore/tease).

Bottom line: you wanna see "porn" then you gotta pay and get through the Age Verification firewall, period. ANY website not doing this will be shut down immediately. That IS (currently) the only way to accomplish a reduction (not total prevention) of free access to porn.

Now, here's the Best Part people:

2. Making porn LESS ACCESSIBLE equals more money. Cha-motherfucking-CHING. Make it HARDER to get your porn fix and you will pay for it. So we, as adult webmasters, affiliates, performers and all the rest, WE win, because we will make BANK if porn is harder to access.

In germany it's similar for nearly 10 years. You may not show hardcore or even some kind of softcore (no genitals, no offensive texts). It's only allowed if you are sure the visitor is 18+. You can assure this via officially accepted AVS systems (i.e. user gets a pin via postal mail and has to enter that pin at the AVS system). But the webmasters didn't make more money, the lost 90% of their sales cause users just have to visit non-german sites to get what they want.

In general, I agree with you. But I doubt that will happen. They will only catch the small fishes and let the whales still make their money with tube sites.

[AHarper]

Why not start with going after illegal torrent/locker sites? They not only provide access to minors but also host stolen content.

But that wouldn't be so easy as hunting small paysite/freesite owners

[Cherry7]

13 to 18 boys need porn more than anyone else....

[DangerX !!!]

This is censorship of free Interwebz!!! Motherfucking motherfuckers!

[The Porn Nerd]

Originally Posted by AHarper

In germany it's similar for nearly 10 years. You may not show hardcore or even some kind of softcore (no genitals, no offensive texts). It's only allowed if you are sure the visitor is 18+. You can assure this via officially accepted AVS systems (i.e. user gets a pin via postal mail and has to enter that pin at the AVS system). But the webmasters didn't make more money, the lost 90% of their sales cause users just have to visit non-german sites to get what they want.

In general, I agree with you. But I doubt that will happen. They will only catch the small fishes and let the whales still make their money with tube sites.

I agree with you. This would only work if EVERY site in the world were a paysite, which is impossible. As long as countries still allow Internet users to access other countries then making something illegal in one country has virtually no effect in another. Look at 2257 and DMCA, those are American laws and how many out-of-US websites follow them?

PS: I usually only come up with solutions that would work if I were King Of The World. Still waiting for that Coronation.....:D

[adultmobile]

Originally Posted by AHarper

In germany it's similar for nearly 10 years. You may not show hardcore or even some kind of softcore (no genitals, no offensive texts). It's only allowed if you are sure the visitor is 18+. You can assure this via officially accepted AVS systems (i.e. user gets a pin via postal mail and has to enter that pin at the AVS system). But the webmasters didn't make more money, the lost 90% of their sales cause users just have to visit non-german sites to get what they want.

In general, I agree with you. But I doubt that will happen. They will only catch the small fishes and let the whales still make their money with tube sites.

Yes I thinkif UK does like Germany, simply the UK guys will visitor foreign sites.

On a side note, France is going to pass a law to fine euro 1500-3000 to each guy found being a customer of a prostitute. By extension, every french could be fined for online prostitution i.e. live cams usage perhaps.

[JFK]

Fitty government fuckheads