How long until "obscene" text is regulated? - GoFuckYourself.com

pr0 · 07-26-2005, 12:38 PM

How long until 2257 type laws will cover "talking" about a dripping wet pussy.

No seriously.....people get arrested for b0mb making texts etc. I would assume its only a matter of time.

Doctor Dre · 07-26-2005, 12:39 PM

Wait till 2257 goes in effect first ... then we'll see what's the next stept

Fizzgig · 07-26-2005, 12:40 PM

Censorship will always be around in some form or another.

pr0 · 07-26-2005, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fizzgig

Censorship will always be around in some form or another.

yea but censoring the internet is just such a tragedy....finally people had a place to unwind & see/read what they wanted

now it'll be just like barnes & noble again.....i'm sure people will start getting arrested for making comments in their blogs soon all over the world

xxxice · 07-26-2005, 12:52 PM

I think it will be harder to censor text than images but, yes your right. Who knows nowadays

pr0 · 07-26-2005, 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vanderweb

I think it will be harder to censor text than images but, yes your right. Who knows nowadays

really?.....their already censoring text entering your e-mail box via spam filtering

whats to stop them from the next steps?

davethetruth · 07-26-2005, 12:57 PM

fuck shit balls ....

xxxice · 07-26-2005, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pr0

really?.....their already censoring text entering your e-mail box via spam filtering

whats to stop them from the next steps?

pr0 I like how you reply so quickly

I am feeling you here. I am just thinking that it will be a lot harder to censor text on websites. U are right about the email issue but I think websites are different. There was quite a shakeup with 2257 but as far as I understand if all proper docs are on hand; u can still show whatever u want. I don't know how they would be able to for instance ask for 2257 based on text linking to other sites.

Are u talking about a more genreal censorship of text or adult related?

pr0 · 07-26-2005, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vanderweb

pr0 I like how you reply so quickly

I am feeling you here. I am just thinking that it will be a lot harder to censor text on websites. U are right about the email issue but I think websites are different. There was quite a shakeup with 2257 but as far as I understand if all proper docs are on hand; u can still show whatever u want. I don't know how they would be able to for instance ask for 2257 based on text linking to other sites.

Are u talking about a more genreal censorship of text or adult related?

I'm simply saying the technology exists already to censor text if we wanted to, using spam filter technology.....& the U.S. controls the master domain name controllers & thus the internet.

So we could impose our will on the world in more ways than just using our military.

Just seems to me when a door is open for evangalists to push god into peoples faces, they use it.

the Shemp · 07-26-2005, 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pr0

yea but censoring the internet is just such a tragedy....finally people had a place to unwind & see/read what they wanted

now it'll be just like barnes & noble again.....i'm sure people will start getting arrested for making comments in their blogs soon all over the world

text is nasty, they make it into those evil things called books...

xxxice · 07-26-2005, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pr0

I'm simply saying the technology exists already to censor text if we wanted to, using spam filter technology.....& the U.S. controls the master domain name controllers & thus the internet.

So we could impose our will on the world in more ways than just using our military.

Just seems to me when a door is open for evangalists to push god into peoples faces, they use it.

Interesting topic I am limited to my responses honestly since I do not know that much about the subject. However, the filtering email issue is quite interesting and if for instance a browser adapated the same use of telling us what and what not to read. The implications are scary

pr0 · 07-26-2005, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the Shemp

text is nasty, they make it into those evil things called books...

it sure does....funny enough right after this post my internet shut off for nearly 12 hours

tungsten · 07-26-2005, 08:02 PM

i wouldnt be surprised if thats the next shit idea of theirs

pr0 · 07-26-2005, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tungsten

i wouldnt be surprised if thats the next shit idea of theirs

you better believe spam filtering will be the next wave in content control

image scanning etc. to find tittys

all kinds of great stuff to come!

seeric · 07-26-2005, 08:10 PM

well, they would need to define "obscenity" first, for every community in the united states, which very drastically in moral and communal standards. if that were possible, larry flynt and hugh hef would be serving 100- life already.

what is obscene in one community is not in another, thats where the GOV has been fucked for a long time.

it just isn't possible to make a federal law.

pornguy · 07-26-2005, 08:11 PM

It will happen right after some idiot parent that lets their kid surf unattended finds the brat reading a sex story!

NKYKev · 07-26-2005, 08:44 PM

Actually, the obscenity laws do apply to textual materials only, as do the provisions of the Communications Decency Act which survived the Supreme Court - namely, anything dealing with "obscenity" and not just "indecency." As for the standards, a panel of Federal Judges uphed the application of a geographical standard when judging obscenity under the CDA - meaning that online materials have to be able to be judged "nonobscene" under the standards of the most restrictive communities in the US to be safe, regardless of where they are made. For more info, you can read this article.

tristan_D · 07-26-2005, 09:05 PM

I 'm pretty certain not that long.

pr0 · 07-26-2005, 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by socalkev

Actually, the obscenity laws do apply to textual materials only, as do the provisions of the Communications Decency Act which survived the Supreme Court - namely, anything dealing with "obscenity" and not just "indecency." As for the standards, a panel of Federal Judges uphed the application of a geographical standard when judging obscenity under the CDA - meaning that online materials have to be able to be judged "nonobscene" under the standards of the most restrictive communities in the US to be safe, regardless of where they are made. For more info, you can read this article.

wow...thats ugly

donkey sheep goat fucking hairballs batman!

NKYKev · 07-26-2005, 09:55 PM

Yeah, its discussed a bit more in this post I made earlier. The main plaintiff, a photographer of images depicting sadomasochistic content, has said she will appeal the decision. The ruling of the three judge panel in this case is the opposite view of the judge in the Extreme Associates case, which held that the application of the "community standards" prong when judging obscenity made no sense in cases involving the Internet, since it is viewed in the privacy of ones own home. Of course, in Extreme Associates, the fact that the content was part of a members area and had to be accessed via a credit card made a big difference in the eyes of the Judge in that case. Other forms of payment, such as ACH and dialers, may not offer the same protection unless there is some sort of "adult verification" technique possible.

basschick · 07-26-2005, 10:19 PM

obscenity can be already prosecuted, whether pics or text.

pr0 · 07-26-2005, 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by basschick

obscenity can be already prosecuted, whether pics or text.

so if i were to say

donkey cock sucking goat fucking shit dripping pussy

i'm already able to be prosecuted?

TheJimmy · 07-26-2005, 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pr0

How long until 2257 type laws will cover "talking" about a dripping wet pussy.

No seriously.....people get arrested for b0mb making texts etc. I would assume its only a matter of time.

I give you my

Award

Seriously, how people didn't see 2257, processor dramas, Truth in Domains Act, the .xxx & filter issues, etc etc etc written on the wall is beyond me... I think some people out there live with boxes on their heads...

of COURSE eventually text will be an issue for obscenity, it ALREADY is in mainstream media, the fucking INTERWEB is slowly growing more regulated and 'mainstreamed' and will eventually be more of a mirror of US TV & Radio industries....

sure, I know...before all the non-US webmasters say fuck off, I'm with you on that....that is going to be the only difference, is foreign players can and will live by their own rules/laws, howeverrrrrrrrrr, if you live in the US you'll be stuck with the laws here...

think about going offshore, make sure you physically move there, some boys in California who had banks offshore, corp in the med, recently got GOT by the feds for some spamming issues, the world is shrinking in those regards...

give it 1-5 years and the 'bad words' list that is used by mainstream media networks will be used and enforced on US websites...

:/

xxxice · 07-26-2005, 11:58 PM

Thanks for the info now I'm worried

The Sultan Of Smut · 07-27-2005, 12:08 AM

Won't happen. 1st amendment cases dealing with different forms of 'expression' is one thing but regulating text/speech/thought is another. The new regulations were introduced by a prude and later expanded on by an asshole. I'm just happy the the prude was so focused on a social issue and only focused his narrow mind on porn instead of a real threat like Clinton's Communications Decency Act. I don't think any government today really gives a shit about porn or sexuality and only addresses it when a core of it's supporters demand something be done. Smut keeps John Q. Public distracted and happy.

07-26-2005, 12:38 PM	#1
pr0 rockin tha trailerpark Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Location: ~Coastal~ Posts: 23,088	How long until "obscene" text is regulated? How long until 2257 type laws will cover "talking" about a dripping wet pussy. No seriously.....people get arrested for b0mb making texts etc. I would assume its only a matter of time. __________________ __________ Loadedca$h - get sum! - Revengebucks - mmm rebills! - webair (gotz sErVrz)

07-26-2005, 12:40 PM	#3
Fizzgig Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: In Your Dreams Posts: 9,649	Censorship will always be around in some form or another. __________________ ---'-,-{@ Sassy Grrrl @}-'-,---

07-26-2005, 12:57 PM	#7
davethetruth Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 2,806	fuck shit balls .... __________________ Rainbow Revenue- The BEST Gay Conversions New Sex Toy Affiliate Program! Get $10.00 Just For Joining! Choose from two Sex Toy Stores to promote: BedroomSports- Since 1998 - Now New & Improved! VibratorWarehouse- New Site with Excellent Conversions!

07-26-2005, 08:02 PM	#13
tungsten Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 10,579	i wouldnt be surprised if thats the next shit idea of theirs __________________ VOYEUR /HOMEMADE, HENTAI / CARTOON, Reality, Amateur, Shemale, Hardcore, Cuckold, Celebrity, Retro/Vintage, ect...ALL OUR SITES >> Unbelievable Ratio \| High % of Rebills \| Bi-Monthly Payments (also to E-Passporte) Ton's of EXCLUSIVE Free content & FHG's \|=> GREAT REVENUE $$$ GUARANTEED!

07-26-2005, 08:11 PM	#16
pornguy Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Homeless Posts: 62,911	It will happen right after some idiot parent that lets their kid surf unattended finds the brat reading a sex story! __________________ PornGuy skype me pornguy_epic AmateurDough The Hottes Shemales online! TChicks.com \| Angeles Cid \| Mariana Cordoba \| MAILERS WELCOME!

07-26-2005, 12:52 PM	#5
xxxice Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 5,042	I think it will be harder to censor text than images but, yes your right. Who knows nowadays

07-26-2005, 08:10 PM	#15
seeric .......... Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: .......... Posts: 41,917	well, they would need to define "obscenity" first, for every community in the united states, which very drastically in moral and communal standards. if that were possible, larry flynt and hugh hef would be serving 100- life already. what is obscene in one community is not in another, thats where the GOV has been fucked for a long time. it just isn't possible to make a federal law.

07-26-2005, 08:44 PM	#17
NKYKev Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 283	Actually, the obscenity laws do apply to textual materials only, as do the provisions of the Communications Decency Act which survived the Supreme Court - namely, anything dealing with "obscenity" and not just "indecency." As for the standards, a panel of Federal Judges uphed the application of a geographical standard when judging obscenity under the CDA - meaning that online materials have to be able to be judged "nonobscene" under the standards of the most restrictive communities in the US to be safe, regardless of where they are made. For more info, you can read this article.

07-26-2005, 09:05 PM	#18
tristan_D Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 7,865	I 'm pretty certain not that long. __________________ Increase your sales. Up to $4 per click.

07-26-2005, 09:55 PM	#20
NKYKev Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 283	Yeah, its discussed a bit more in this post I made earlier. The main plaintiff, a photographer of images depicting sadomasochistic content, has said she will appeal the decision. The ruling of the three judge panel in this case is the opposite view of the judge in the Extreme Associates case, which held that the application of the "community standards" prong when judging obscenity made no sense in cases involving the Internet, since it is viewed in the privacy of ones own home. Of course, in Extreme Associates, the fact that the content was part of a members area and had to be accessed via a credit card made a big difference in the eyes of the Judge in that case. Other forms of payment, such as ACH and dialers, may not offer the same protection unless there is some sort of "adult verification" technique possible.

07-26-2005, 10:19 PM	#21
basschick Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: el lay, ca usa Posts: 2,540	obscenity can be already prosecuted, whether pics or text. __________________ Got Gay and For Women Traffic?

07-26-2005, 11:58 PM	#24
xxxice Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 5,042	Thanks for the info now I'm worried

07-27-2005, 12:08 AM	#25
The Sultan Of Smut Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Vancouver Posts: 4,325	Won't happen. 1st amendment cases dealing with different forms of 'expression' is one thing but regulating text/speech/thought is another. The new regulations were introduced by a prude and later expanded on by an asshole. I'm just happy the the prude was so focused on a social issue and only focused his narrow mind on porn instead of a real threat like Clinton's Communications Decency Act. I don't think any government today really gives a shit about porn or sexuality and only addresses it when a core of it's supporters demand something be done. Smut keeps John Q. Public distracted and happy.