This should be banned from this industry NOW. - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

wyldblyss · 06-08-2008, 07:26 PM

OMG, as a mom, that makes me want to vomit. Why in the hell did i click that link, I had no idea it would look that real or that sick

AlienQ - BANNED FOR LIFE · 06-08-2008, 07:26 PM

I invented Banning from the industry.

tony286 · 06-08-2008, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by corvette

thanks tony for pointing this thread out.

we will get that site reviewed to make sure it follows our aup and policies, if you guys see anything else you think deserves attention, please email [email protected] or [email protected]

thanks

I figured instead of just throwing judgements at these people. You might be able to shed some light that we dont know. Their site does say every model is drawn to be 18

Spunky · 06-08-2008, 07:33 PM

Agreed,shit like that shouldn't be allowed even though it's anime

the indigo · 06-08-2008, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pussyserver

if its legal... its legal

Why do people always feels a need to pass judgement on other people?

Thats what we have law for

just like you dont like that site... some people dont feel the exact same way about all porn... some people feel all porn is sick and discusting

stop trying to fucking be the moral police and worry about your own biz

The law says 18 years or older. If you are too retarded to see the subtlety, you must be the first to bitch about new stricter laws that close the gap on our freedom years after years, especially in USA. Patriot Act III?

SmokeyTheBear · 06-08-2008, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PBucksJohn

The fact that people on this board are sitting here defending pictures that are obviously meant to portray children having sex is simply astounding.

It isn't drawing a line or comparing it to people who want all porn banned. It is child porn. I don't think there is much else to say here

i think the problem is some people don't agree that the pictures are " obviously meant to portray children". Most of the girls look over 18 to be honest , there are def some questionable ones but even those ones i would find it hard to charge they were intentionally making them look underage.

I'm pretty sure in canada some of those might be considered illegal , but it's hard to say , it all has to do with if whomever is judging the pictures figures it is simulated cp

I started a thread the other day about westboro baptist church the other day and the fact directnic is their registrar , basically asking what people thought about it. Most people generally agreed it is up to the courts to enforce laws not registrars, and were talking REAL victims here not simulated drawings. I would think most people would generally feel the same way about processing.

notoldschool · 06-08-2008, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IllTestYourGirls

Focus should be on catching real CP and getting those fucking bastards in jail.

Just head to your nearest church.

Angry Jew Cat - Banned for Life · 06-08-2008, 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Some Guy

Who's to say the artist intentionally made them look younger on purpose?

there's plenty of 3d stuff loating around that is fairly obviously meant to be underage...

pornpf69 · 06-08-2008, 09:18 PM

anyone has anything to say about toons from The Simpsons or Family Guy fucking?

Some Guy · 06-08-2008, 09:36 PM

Seems like this is being blown a tad bit out of proportion, and I don't even like these 3D sites. Most of the chicks look over 18 to me. And to slam on sites like this when there are real sites out there that feature girls who look way young doing all sorts of hardcore shit seems a bit... off.

the indigo · 06-08-2008, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bringer

i guess the real question is how many 18 year olds wear schoolgirl outfits still or cheerleader uniforms? how many in the sets wearing schoolgirl/cheer outfits are petite, with braces, and look underage? you've never seen a schoolgirl set and thought the model was underage until you saw it was owned by a big company you know is legit? a schoolgirl who btw is sitting at a desk in the front row of a room that looks like an elementary school classroom. the fact is the same "pedos" you point to who love this shit also love the schoolgirl/cheer niches. should we not allow them either? or should we instead focus on keeping people from being victimized? if this was real cp, id do what i could to get the victim help by passing the link to the proper authorities. its a drawing so who the fuck cares? no one was traumatized in the making of these images and the people they cater to love anything that makes the model APPEAR to be underage. just imagine what a jury might think viewing one of those sets. a petite "undeveloped" girl in a schoolgirl outfit blowing a "teacher" while sitting in a desk that no normal sized person could fit in. obscene?

Oh come on, there is a big difference in between a 18 years old in a schoolgirl outfit that looks like 16-17 years old MAX because I believe any normal male can be turned on by 15+ years old girls.

Pedo = under 12 to me. Not a college, university schoolgirl.

the indigo · 06-08-2008, 10:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

I don't know of a link to that Supreme Court ruling. I saw it on the news when it happened. I agreed with it. No, I don't agree with screwing kids...but I did agree that once you made drawing children naked illegal and/or writing words about having sex with them..you'd pretty much have to raid the Vatican to destroy classical statues and architecture, and then burn about 3/4 of classic literature.
I didn't look at that link but for a split second...like I said, it's not my thing. But it was just cartoons right? Guys, you can't make what people think illegal, and you can't make what somebody draws on a piece of paper or creates digitally (the moden equivalent) illegal. If you do, you're just handing over the last tiny bits of your freedom to the govt. If you think it's disgusting then don't look at it and don't spend money on it. And hell, don't promote it. Who the fuck knows? Maybe some sick pedo will use that as jack material instead of living out his sick fantasies?
But I'm pretty sure from what I've read that pedo's have no interest in cartoons or even bitches in their 20's dressed up like kids.
I'm also pretty sure they don't spend a whole lot of time on porn sites too.
I have nothing to back any of that up. But from everything I've ever read about them, they seem to be more interested in reality as opposed to virtual stuff, and only use computers to meet real victims in chat rooms and such.
I don't know how far things may or may not go with cartoons depicting shit like that. But then again, I don't really care. I take care of my kids and monitor them carefully. There were plenty of pedos 40 years ago when I was a kid and my parents watched over me carefully too.
Legally, I don't know what that may or may not lead to. I assume that the Supreme Court has spoken for now. Maybe they'll change their minds later. Since I like women in their mid 20's and up, with big titties and big round asses...I guess it's a non-issue what people do about cartoons.
I even wonder if a real CP site has even ever existed that made money? I'm clueless on that one. Hasn't that shit pretty much always existed sort of underground in secret societal circles? I'm unaware that it's ever been a "for profit" thing.
But I could be way off-base.
That's why I don't think they have ever found a true CP person in this industry. Well, that and the fact that we'd all get together and do it the right way...no govt. needed. Just a ride out to the desert.

Just the fact you did not click the link and can't see the technology advancement that will results in better, easier content like that in the future gets beyond me.

That shit is currently promoted on the biggests TGP/MPG with CCBill.com as the processor. If nobody cares and wait until the justice or the general public to do something about it, more galleries like that, plus the "amateur-half-naked-no-2257-available" that are also borderline. I really don't like the direction this industry is taking.

Anyway, I think more and more webmasters in this industry are disconnected from the reality.

CyberHustler · 06-08-2008, 11:10 PM

Deliberately creating animation that looks like kids performing sexual acts is wrong and should be illegal in my worthless opinion.

the indigo · 06-08-2008, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SCORE-Cash

Guys this is now considered illegal in the UK. So keep that in mind, when promoting this type of content.

Good to know. United Kingdom people must be brighter than some people on this forum. It kills me to read stupid replies based on laws. I'm pro-freedom and hate to be policed. My whole life is based on freedom. I will fight for my rights until I'm dead... and have no problem with most libertine people.

BUT I have my moral, ethics and can tell if something is right or wrong by myself without the opinion of the government or the fucking laws. In this case, I believe it is our responsibility to not encourage these things, as webmaster of this industry, community or whatever you want to call it.

the indigo · 06-08-2008, 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IllTestYourGirls

They totally should start banning shit like this. But lets start with the museums. This sculpture is clearly of an under aged girl.

Cant get more life like than that!

This is a good example of idiocy. Even my red fish would be able to tell the difference... retard.

the indigo · 06-08-2008, 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pussyserver

The point I am trying make is this? morals and personal opinion cannot stand as the barometer of legality. While I disagree with this I support their right to produce it as along as its legal

It's illegal in UK and probably many other wise countries.

It's trying to go-over an already clear law: Child Porn.

Any court decision will be based on intention. How is that hard to understand?

darksoul · 06-08-2008, 11:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the indigo

BUT I have my moral, ethics and can tell if something is right or wrong by myself without the opinion of the government or the fucking laws. In this case, I believe it is our responsibility to not encourage these things, as webmaster of this industry, community or whatever you want to call it.

Do you see the problem here ?
By muslim standards a nipple means jail/death.

Which standard do we take as a reference ?

the indigo · 06-08-2008, 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PBucksJohn

The fact that people on this board are sitting here defending pictures that are obviously meant to portray children having sex is simply astounding.

It isn't drawing a line or comparing it to people who want all porn banned. It is child porn. I don't think there is much else to say here

Honestly John, I think it's the saddest thing. I would not even imagine so many people trying to defend this.

I don't really visit forums anymore since 2000-2001, but I'm upset about reactions.

bringer · 06-08-2008, 11:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the indigo

The law says 18 years or older. If you are too retarded to see the subtlety, you must be the first to bitch about new stricter laws that close the gap on our freedom years after years, especially in USA. Patriot Act III?

and then...

Quote:

Originally Posted by the indigo

Oh come on, there is a big difference in between a 18 years old in a schoolgirl outfit that looks like 16-17 years old MAX because I believe any normal male can be turned on by 15+ years old girls.

Pedo = under 12 to me. Not a college, university schoolgirl.

theres a big difference in your eyes. isnt under 18 illegal? ive seen some schoolgirl shit that looks YOUNG (12) which was their intention and my point for bring it up. you talk about banning these anime pics because they intend it to look like a young girl when thats exactly what the schoolgirl people are going for. HAIRLESS(shaven) petite girls with NO TITS and braces. at what age does the average kid get braces? senior year of hs?

these are schoolgirls who btw are either shot in a primany school classroom or a pink "kiddie" bed getting a visit from uncle charlie. you just dont think its wrong because they have 2257 stamped on the page so you know no child was exploited and no real crime took place. in the end, if its wrong for 3d nerds to go for the young teen look (under 18=ILLEGAL), it should also be wrong when programs pick and pay models in hopes of achieving the same look.

how old does this girl look to you? click threw and you'll hear about how "daddy's got a secret." awesome toy blocks on that template btw! ccbill?
http://galleries.dirtybabysitter.com...3CCBILL872295/

the indigo · 06-09-2008, 12:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by darksoul

Do you see the problem here ?
By muslim standards a nipple means jail/death.

Which standard do we take as a reference ?

Try to post a virtual 3D muslim girl with a nipple on a public board in any muslim country and people will run after you, not the government.

Child porn is already illegal in USA. And who cares if it was legal? Is it legal to you?

Should we legalize beastiality because it's legal in 2-3 countries?

Can we have our own standards without having to wait until the U.S. Justice that is ran by a bunch of... humans?

I figure in a few years you won't even be able to tell the difference between reality and fiction. Little girls will be fucked in Flash format on MGP and Tube sites and it will be okay because it will be written "even if it looks 100% real, these pictures are virtual. No 2267 required".

Common sense based on existant Child Porn laws.

bringer · 06-09-2008, 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the indigo

Try to post a virtual 3D muslim girl with a nipple on a public board in any muslim country and people will run after you, not the government.

Child porn is already illegal in USA. And who cares if it was legal? Is it legal to you?

Should we legalize beastiality because it's legal in 2-3 countries?

Can we have our own standards without having to wait until the U.S. Justice that is ran by a bunch of... humans?

I figure in a few years you won't even be able to tell the difference between reality and fiction. Little girls will be fucked in Flash format on MGP and Tube sites and it will be okay because it will be written "even if it looks 100% real, these pictures are virtual. No 2267 required".

Common sense based on existant Child Porn laws.

you speak as though allowing an animated picture that MIGHT depict an underage girl is the same as legalizing CP. CP VICTIMIZED CHILDREN! whos victimized in these pictures? in your mind is an animated picture of a guy fucking a chicken beastiality?

i thought so

the indigo · 06-09-2008, 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bringer

HAIRLESS(shaven) petite girls with NO TITS and braces. at what age does the average kid get braces? senior year of hs?

these are schoolgirls who btw are either shot in a primany school classroom or a pink "kiddie" bed getting a visit from uncle charlie. you just dont think its wrong because they have 2257 stamped on the page so you know no child was exploited and no real crime took place. in the end, if its wrong for 3d nerds to go for the young teen look (under 18=ILLEGAL), it should also be wrong when programs pick and pay models in hopes of achieving the same look.

how old does this girl look to you? click threw and you'll hear about how "daddy's got a secret." awesome toy blocks on that template btw! ccbill?
http://galleries.dirtybabysitter.com...3CCBILL872295/

I completely agree with you regarding this... both are wrong to me, but most of the "schoolgirls" out there are not looking like her. At some point, the audience understands the theatral aspect of the scene. The babysitter series has 1-2 "borderline" models but you can clearly see they are legal in outfits. Still, I know a few TGP/MPG that refuse to list the babysitter series. This is what I'm talking about about to NOT SUPPORT this. If the intention is to sell to CP audience, legal or not, it should not be supported from inside the community, starting with private CC processors, MPG/TGP, etc.

A don't remember the name of a sponsor... but they had 15-16 years old looking girls. 2257 legal. I don't support this, but I believe the 15-16 is not what the pedo people are looking into. It is the 5-12 of age... which is easily done via 3D models.

GrouchyAdmin · 06-09-2008, 12:17 AM

The short of it: It's obviously catering to pedophiles.

The long of it: It's computer rendered, and hence, not technically pedophilia.

the indigo · 06-09-2008, 12:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bringer

you speak as though allowing an animated picture that MIGHT depict an underage girl is the same as legalizing CP. CP VICTIMIZED CHILDREN! whos victimized in these pictures? in your mind is an animated picture of a guy fucking a chicken beastiality?

i thought so

Maybe because I see the big picture and especially the psychological aspect on our culture the population.

I have read 2 weeks ago in the newspapers that they started creating toon films for children (4-6 years old) with girls of the same age holding cell phones in Britney Spears outfits. Where the fuck are we going?

Then we wonder why they all need psychological assistance by age of 10 and fucked the first time at 8 years old in a child-gangbang.

bringer · 06-09-2008, 12:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the indigo

I completely agree with you regarding this... both are wrong to me, but most of the "schoolgirls" out there are not looking like her. At some point, the audience understands the theatral aspect of the scene. The babysitter series has 1-2 "borderline" models but you can clearly see they are legal in outfits. Still, I know a few TGP/MPG that refuse to list the babysitter series. This is what I'm talking about about to NOT SUPPORT this. If the intention is to sell to CP audience, legal or not, it should not be supported from inside the community, starting with private CC processors, MPG/TGP, etc.

A don't remember the name of a sponsor... but they had 15-16 years old looking girls. 2257 legal. I don't support this, but I believe the 15-16 is not what the pedo people are looking into. It is the 5-12 of age... which is easily done via 3D models.

so is 1-2 "borderline" models OK? how much of the site this thread was started about features the underage 3d model you're talking about? 1 in 20? you say we shouldnt support this at all but many who posted outrage IN THIS THREAD push sponsors who have sites like that. should we just stop pushing everyone because at some point they use a model that someone might consider to look underage? is that the line now? is it right what they're going for? no. should it be against the law to DRAW A FUCKING PICTURE? NO. laws are created TO PROTECT PEOPLE, not limit their freedom because someone might get offending. obscene = offensive. MANY people are offended when they see any girl, 18 or not, getting gangbanged by 10 black dudes with horse cocks. should we ban that? using your standard, this could be possible. you wouldnt like it, but it would eventually happen. and why do you keep saying 15+ is ok to fantasize about? Id be willing to BET 80% of this country would disagree with you meaning when you're in court for pushing a girl who LOOKS 15 but was actually 21, the jury of your "peers" can look to the LAW and determine that 18 is the age that you're allowed to lust over. 15 is too young and you're going to JAIL. stop seeking laws (limits on freedom) when victims are non-existant.

Quote:

Originally Posted by the indigo

Maybe because I see the big picture and especially the psychological aspect on our culture the population.

I have read 2 weeks ago in the newspapers that they started creating toon films for children (4-6 years old) with girls of the same age holding cell phones in Britney Spears outfits. Where the fuck are we going?

Then we wonder why they all need psychological assistance by age of 10 and fucked the first time at 8 years old in a child-gangbang.

so you want to put people in jail because of what it MIGHT do to the community? dont some already argue that porn ruins marriages giving men an impossible expectation from their partner? lets ban porn too. or is an argument against banning porn that men have to SEEK THIS MATERIAL OUT making it their decision rather then something pushed on them. stop thinking that your limits = the right limits. once we relinquish this freedom of speech/expression the hammer will fall and the limits will be set by those IN CHARGE WHO ALREADY HATE PORN. if plain vanilla porn, IF ANY, is your thing, keep on with your message that something created without a victim must be censored.

ps, what does the big picture YOU see have to do with the topic at hand? is the site you're complaining about marketing to children? how will these 3d models influence the lives of children?

After Shock Media · 06-09-2008, 12:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the indigo

Should we legalize beastiality because it's legal in 2-3 countries?

Not to burst your bubble but bestiality is still federally legal in the US and is still legal is many states. That is a different topic though.

People need to be able to hold onto two separate trains of thought in these types of arguments.

One side needs to follow through with the idea of policing thought crimes that have not victims. Again no different then me using very high end special effects to kill a person. It is not real, it can be catering to sick people, there is no victim, and of course killing someone is indeed a existing crime. This is a slope that nobody should be allowed to slip down. (btw tony404 I spoke out against the obscenity text stories as a FYI, even though they were revolting).

On the other side of the argument is taking the moral and ethical stance to shun and not allow such material near your sites or your traffic. Just like most of us already do in regards to bestiality, despite its legality.

For some they may not see how this is possible but one can take both stances. Otherwise where do we draw these lines and who draws them. What fake crimes shall be legal and what ones shall not.

bringer · 06-09-2008, 12:58 AM

i give up. im tired of defending max hc and this 3d model site from you people. i figured people who claim to be in the porn industry would have a little more common sense and see that banning what THEY consider offensive is what the people ATTACKING ALL PORN are doing. They think they're doing whats best for everyone by attacking everything that offends them, even when NO VICTIM EXISTS. Gay Porn = offensive to MANY. Why is your line rational and good and theirs irrational? im sure there are more who would agree that Gay Porn is obscene then not so who gets to decide? Them or you? Everyone thinks their line in the sand is where the line should be but dont realize the laws protecting speech where put in place so one group couldnt censor the other. so one group couldnt say, "how dare you say that about Muhammad. you're going to jail for offending US." i guess ill go back to lurking, reading the "spam me with X sites" threads looking for new sponsors to push.

keep rationalizing your own destruction you narcissistic fucks. ill be watching.

poto · 06-09-2008, 01:19 AM

all I can do is shake my head...

morons in this thread bitching, yet some of those same people promote teen content... if you were to draw that teen content it would look identical to some of what was linked to...

now, don't get me wrong... I don't promote lolicon or 3d lolicon stuff... I want no part of that... but I just think it's ironic to see people who are making money on very young looking girls here complaining about young looking 3d art...

cykoe6 · 06-09-2008, 04:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by After Shock Media

Is it really possible to have a crime without a victim?
What level of thought crimes are ok. I mean should I be prosecuted for thinking about pushing someone off of a subway platform just to see if he would bounce of the front of the train or actually splat? If thats ok, if I use computers to make it a fake reality I can share with others then does it become illegal?

It is amazing how quickly people jump on the idea of prosecuting victimless thought crimes now a days.

Emil · 06-09-2008, 04:33 AM

You think the boy in this pic is supposed to be 18?

http://galleries.incestsex-3d.com/22...l?id=proxylist

shinyangels · 06-09-2008, 05:10 AM

Wow
First off All our models are built from ADULT meshes. Not one single image on our site is created from a child mesh. They are all of adult scale. Some of our models are youthful in appearance but still adult scale. When we do double sets both actors are of the same scale, what I mean by that is they are the same size, hieght ect. we do not make the girls half the size to make them look like children.

There are allot of 3d site that make obvious depictions of children having sex, both visually and in the description and text, We do not portray our models to be underage, we make it very clear they were drawn to be over 18. So to lump this site in with other cp sites is insulting. I like to be creative a draw a variety of girls, ranging in ages 18 to 28 ish

Out of the 340 sets I have on that site, there are maybe 3 to 4 sets that maybe ridding the line of youthfullness but they are still built from an adult mesh. Its all in the person viewing and how they precieve it to be. Thats the great thing about any type of artwork wether it be humonoid or landscape how it is precived is different by every viewer

iseeyou · 06-09-2008, 05:10 AM

If you support banning virtual cp, then you support reduction in masturbation material for pedo's which may lead to increase in real child abuse.

Save the children. Let pedo's masturbate to virtual cp!

Mutt · 06-09-2008, 06:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sharphead

I wonder where Mutt is with his Private School Jewel site... hmm...

how and why would you include Jewel in this thread? she doesn't look underage nor has she been shot to appear younger than she is.

pornguy · 06-09-2008, 06:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pussyserver

if its legal... its legal

Why do people always feels a need to pass judgement on other people?

Thats what we have law for

just like you dont like that site... some people dont feel the exact same way about all porn... some people feel all porn is sick and discusting

stop trying to fucking be the moral police and worry about your own biz

thats just the thing, It may be legal today by an asshair, but as soon as some attention is brought to it, it wont be, and at the same time it will be wrapped into the label of " Porn " and not " C P " and that is something that we need to get away from.

CHMOD · 06-09-2008, 06:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pussyserver

if its legal... its legal

Why do people always feels a need to pass judgement on other people?

Thats what we have law for

just like you dont like that site... some people dont feel the exact same way about all porn... some people feel all porn is sick and discusting

stop trying to fucking be the moral police and worry about your own biz

What he said.

+ the site is not that bad to me. I've seen real models looking that young and everybody here applausing and wanting to promote.

I.E : http://www.selina18.com/73560966/tour.html

Most of you guys are a bunch of hypocrites.

CHMOD · 06-09-2008, 06:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emil

You think the boy in this pic is supposed to be 18?

http://galleries.incestsex-3d.com/22...l?id=proxylist

I do agree on this one though = This is unacceptable and should not be related to the adult industry. Unlike the other site in this thread, this is clearly child porn.

TheSenator · 06-09-2008, 06:44 AM

Chew that around for a bit you moral police.

TheSenator · 06-09-2008, 06:46 AM

Let me pee on you....

TheSenator · 06-09-2008, 06:50 AM

The morally police are usually filled with hypocrisy.

CDSmith · 06-09-2008, 07:08 AM

Some of you are definitely confusing fantasy with reality here.

MichaelP · 06-09-2008, 07:16 AM

This is just PLAIN WRONG... Reporting to ASACP now..

maybe CC-Bill are not aware of this : 2cents

Some Guy · 06-09-2008, 07:29 AM

The legal age of consent in a lot of states is 16. Just throwing that out there. People seem to think it's 18 for every state. It's not.

And people also throw around the term "pedo" too often. A pedo is somebody who lusts after prepubescent children.

Not defending or attacking this new niche, just stating some facts people seem to gloss over.

undersoul · 06-09-2008, 07:32 AM

damn that first page girl looks like she's 12, not good

CDSmith · 06-09-2008, 08:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelP

This is just PLAIN WRONG... Reporting to ASACP now..

I'm going to hazard a pretty good guess that ASACP is concerned with real cp, where real children are really being abused. Not this faux fake fantasy shit that involves no real child at all and may or may not depict anything underage (depending on who's viewing it, obviously, as is evident in this thread).

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelP

maybe CC-Bill are not aware of this : 2cents

You should read the entire thread. Someone from CCBill already replied.

V_RocKs · 06-09-2008, 08:24 AM

Quote:

18 U.S.C. § 2252 prohibits the production, transportation, or knowing receipt or distribution of any visual depiction "of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct." For the purposes of Title 18, 18 U.S.C. § 2256 defines a "minor" as any person under the age of eighteen years, and "sexually explicit conduct" as actual or simulated

Seems pretty clear to me.. this is CP

Quentin · 06-09-2008, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by V_RocKs

Seems pretty clear to me.. this is CP

In that snippet of US code that you quoted, "simulated" refers to the sexual conduct, not the depiction itself being simulated. In other words, that statute prohibits depicting a simulated sexual act with a real child, not depictions involving simulated humans.

It is also worth noting that nothing in court's ruling in FSC v. Ashcroft (the "virtual cp" case) prevents a prosecutor from indicting simulated cp as obscene material -- they just can't charge the producer/distributor with producing/distributing cp, because the material does not involve actual underage human beings.

If you can indict Karen Fletcher for obscenity in response to her writing and selling cp stories, you can indict an artist for obscenity in response to them creating and selling CP cartoons.

I'm not saying that the government necessarily *should* pursue such prosecutions, just that they *can* do so.

_Richard_ · 06-09-2008, 10:41 AM

that is messed up

Niktamer · 06-09-2008, 10:55 AM

does this crap actually convert ? ... even if i was a potential client i would be scare to register my cc on a site like this.... it so close to CP that its look like a trap from the fbi to build a list of potential pedo.

Altheon · 06-09-2008, 11:34 AM

It may adhere to the letter of the law but it's definitely going against the spirit of it.

tranza · 06-09-2008, 11:41 AM

Oh men this is terrible!

06-08-2008, 07:26 PM	#52
AlienQ - BANNED FOR LIFE best designer on GFY Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: IALIEN.COM - High Definition Video and Photographic Productions -ICQ 78943384 Posts: 30,307	I invented Banning from the industry. __________________ NAKED HOSTING FTW!11 I'm On The INSANE PLAN $9.95/mo! \| The Alien Blog Adult News Worth Reading Updated Daily \| Content For Sale! 641 PICS 216 MINUTES OF VIDEO $350.00 \|ICQ: 78943384 \|

06-08-2008, 07:33 PM	#54
Spunky I need a beer Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: ♠ Toiletville ♠ Posts: 133,982	Agreed,shit like that shouldn't be allowed even though it's anime __________________ *YOUR INFORMATION HERE*

06-08-2008, 09:18 PM	#59
pornpf69 Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Brasil Posts: 15,782	anyone has anything to say about toons from The Simpsons or Family Guy fucking? __________________ Delight Toys Store! Cumming Sooooon MY ICQ# 169833797

06-08-2008, 09:36 PM	#60
Some Guy Affordable Content! Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Tucson, Arizona Posts: 1,750	Seems like this is being blown a tad bit out of proportion, and I don't even like these 3D sites. Most of the chicks look over 18 to me. And to slam on sites like this when there are real sites out there that feature girls who look way young doing all sorts of hardcore shit seems a bit... off. __________________ Need a Cheap Design? - Cheap Quality Content Available! Fuck you Michelle Malkin and Fox News

06-08-2008, 11:10 PM	#63
CyberHustler Masterbaiter Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 28,321	Deliberately creating animation that looks like kids performing sexual acts is wrong and should be illegal in my worthless opinion. __________________ “If you can convince the lowest white man he’s better than the best colored man, he won’t notice you’re picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he’ll empty his pockets for you.”

06-08-2008, 07:26 PM	#51
wyldblyss Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: The Buck Starts Here Posts: 5,779	OMG, as a mom, that makes me want to vomit. Why in the hell did i click that link, I had no idea it would look that real or that sick

06-09-2008, 12:17 AM	#73
GrouchyAdmin Now choke yourself! Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 12,085	The short of it: It's obviously catering to pedophiles. The long of it: It's computer rendered, and hence, not technically pedophilia. __________________ AIM: GrouchyGfy

06-09-2008, 12:58 AM	#77
bringer i have man boobies Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: van down by the river Posts: 13,082	i give up. im tired of defending max hc and this 3d model site from you people. i figured people who claim to be in the porn industry would have a little more common sense and see that banning what THEY consider offensive is what the people ATTACKING ALL PORN are doing. They think they're doing whats best for everyone by attacking everything that offends them, even when NO VICTIM EXISTS. Gay Porn = offensive to MANY. Why is your line rational and good and theirs irrational? im sure there are more who would agree that Gay Porn is obscene then not so who gets to decide? Them or you? Everyone thinks their line in the sand is where the line should be but dont realize the laws protecting speech where put in place so one group couldnt censor the other. so one group couldnt say, "how dare you say that about Muhammad. you're going to jail for offending US." i guess ill go back to lurking, reading the "spam me with X sites" threads looking for new sponsors to push. keep rationalizing your own destruction you narcissistic fucks. ill be watching. __________________ 333-765-551

06-09-2008, 01:19 AM	#78
poto Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 116	all I can do is shake my head... morons in this thread bitching, yet some of those same people promote teen content... if you were to draw that teen content it would look identical to some of what was linked to... now, don't get me wrong... I don't promote lolicon or 3d lolicon stuff... I want no part of that... but I just think it's ironic to see people who are making money on very young looking girls here complaining about young looking 3d art... __________________ icq 236-802-704

06-09-2008, 04:33 AM	#80
Emil Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Sweden Posts: 5,657	You think the boy in this pic is supposed to be 18? http://galleries.incestsex-3d.com/22...l?id=proxylist __________________ Free 🅑🅘🅣🅒🅞🅘🅝🅢 Every Hour (Yes, really. Free ₿itCoins.) (Signup with ONLY your Email and Password. You can also refer people and get even more.)

06-09-2008, 05:10 AM	#81
shinyangels Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 114	Wow First off All our models are built from ADULT meshes. Not one single image on our site is created from a child mesh. They are all of adult scale. Some of our models are youthful in appearance but still adult scale. When we do double sets both actors are of the same scale, what I mean by that is they are the same size, hieght ect. we do not make the girls half the size to make them look like children. There are allot of 3d site that make obvious depictions of children having sex, both visually and in the description and text, We do not portray our models to be underage, we make it very clear they were drawn to be over 18. So to lump this site in with other cp sites is insulting. I like to be creative a draw a variety of girls, ranging in ages 18 to 28 ish Out of the 340 sets I have on that site, there are maybe 3 to 4 sets that maybe ridding the line of youthfullness but they are still built from an adult mesh. Its all in the person viewing and how they precieve it to be. Thats the great thing about any type of artwork wether it be humonoid or landscape how it is precived is different by every viewer __________________ www.shinydollars.com - Teen and Fetish

06-09-2008, 05:10 AM	#82
iseeyou So Fucking Banned Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 306	If you support banning virtual cp, then you support reduction in masturbation material for pedo's which may lead to increase in real child abuse. Save the children. Let pedo's masturbate to virtual cp!

06-09-2008, 06:44 AM	#87
TheSenator Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: NJ Posts: 13,340	Chew that around for a bit you moral police. __________________ ISeekGirls.com since 2005

06-09-2008, 06:46 AM	#88
TheSenator Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: NJ Posts: 13,340	Let me pee on you.... __________________ ISeekGirls.com since 2005

06-09-2008, 06:50 AM	#89
TheSenator Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: NJ Posts: 13,340	The morally police are usually filled with hypocrisy. __________________ ISeekGirls.com since 2005

06-09-2008, 07:08 AM	#90
CDSmith Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Location: My network is hosted at TECHIEMEDIA.net ...Wait, you meant where am I located at? Oh... okay, I'm in Winnipeg, Canada. Oops. :) Posts: 51,460	Some of you are definitely confusing fantasy with reality here. __________________ *Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!* ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!! Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634

06-09-2008, 07:16 AM	#91
MichaelP Registered User Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: QWEBEC Corporate Office Posts: 7,124	This is just PLAIN WRONG... Reporting to ASACP now.. maybe CC-Bill are not aware of this : 2cents

06-09-2008, 07:29 AM	#92
Some Guy Affordable Content! Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Tucson, Arizona Posts: 1,750	The legal age of consent in a lot of states is 16. Just throwing that out there. People seem to think it's 18 for every state. It's not. And people also throw around the term "pedo" too often. A pedo is somebody who lusts after prepubescent children. Not defending or attacking this new niche, just stating some facts people seem to gloss over. __________________ Need a Cheap Design? - Cheap Quality Content Available! Fuck you Michelle Malkin and Fox News

06-09-2008, 07:32 AM	#93
undersoul Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: underground Posts: 1,212	damn that first page girl looks like she's 12, not good __________________ RIP TD

06-09-2008, 10:41 AM	#97
_Richard_ Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Earth Posts: 30,990	that is messed up

06-09-2008, 10:55 AM	#98
Niktamer Lord of the Leads Industry Role: Join Date: May 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 3,021	does this crap actually convert ? ... even if i was a potential client i would be scare to register my cc on a site like this.... it so close to CP that its look like a trap from the fbi to build a list of potential pedo. __________________

06-09-2008, 11:34 AM	#99
Altheon Confirmed User Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 506	It may adhere to the letter of the law but it's definitely going against the spirit of it.

06-09-2008, 11:41 AM	#100
tranza ICQ: 197-556-237 Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: BRASIL !!! Posts: 57,559	Oh men this is terrible! __________________ I'm just a newbie.