Webmaster Jailed
 

Came accross this, originaly printed in the brittish 'guardian' newspaper, Why are the media so vague in these storys!? this article doesnt even point out what the guy has specifally done!


http://www.guardian.co.uk/internetne...393646,00.html

Good post. The charges were extremely vague though. Are there any laws in the UK against porn?

interesting, anyone know more?

hmm I was just inquiring about this a couple of days ago.

Yeh, they got some weird regs over there. More than likely it had to be pretty intense stuff and I imagine you know what.

Here is a link which says what he was convicted for .

http://outrage.nabumedia.com/pressrelease.asp?ID=2

Found another link:

http://www.thisisbrighton.co.uk/brig...NEWS750ZM.html

It says it was extreme pornography. I think they have strict laws on running adult sites over there

Yep, sounds like he got caught in Operation Ore.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1244997.stm

damn that sucks

no matter already posted

yeah so it looks like he was convicted on the grounds of indecent images in previews and over the top content many probbaly didnt wish to see! therefore yes hes in the wrong, even more so under british law!

But why does the media have to potray it like this? anybody reading that guardian article would presume all interent porn is against the law!

Rogue webmasters give us a bad name, the media give us a worse one! :BangBang:

disturbing

Yeh, very!

There are no laws. That's the problem.

Well... there are laws against CP and similar, but who knows whether it's possible to get away with S&M or pissing?

Britain is one of the most sexually repressed societies on the planet. Apparently sexual intercourse between consenting adults just isn't normal. As naysayers continue their attempt to tighten the bolts on sexuality and pornography, it's only going to become a bigger problem. "Problem" in their eyes.

It's a sad state of affairs when your entire community become tabloid zombies. If only they knew the half of it.

I completely agree with those views, the problem is porn is very much classed as a bad thing in the uk more so than in the us. The media should not group legitate adult sites with people who promote and sell cp amoung other things! that is rediculas and more to the point slanderous!

New more detailed international laws need to be set for all adult material on the net, thats is the only way to go.

if this is the same case I read a while back the guy had scat stuff on his site. You have to have something really extreme to get the interested in chasing you.

Yup, just found this qoute in one of the articles:

"The second and third pages were pay-to-view and featured gay "scat". The jury acquitted him of the counts relating to the pay-to-view pages."

Gay + Scat = hello

Hey M0rph3us... look me up on ICQ when you get a second 174467670 I'd like to ask you something

Geez.....

I've stared at the screen too long. I thought this post was titled Webmaster Jihad.

I got scared for a second!

LOL!! :1orglaugh

think you should go off to bed

This is just another reason we live in a fucked up country...

He was convicted for displaying the soft porn, not the pay per view stuff.

I'll tell you what I think could have really happened...

The "detective" is a closet homosexual, he was fulfilling his male desire when all of a sudden, Lucy his 12 year old daughter walked in on him pulling one out over pics of gay scat... He spun around trying to put away his cock, when his wife walked in... Then his mother, father and the rest of his family that were arriving for the family reunion...

Shitting himself he quickly said "look at this disgusting depraved porn, I'm going to make sure they get shut down!"...

He jails the poor webmaster guy on some trumped up bulshit charge and saves his marriage in the process

well the website he got done for was a gay porn site. the site it says in one of the articles is menscat.com so i would imagine it was a scat site, although i could be wrong. and this is illegal in the uk

The media did beef it up slightly..... as per usual... One article claiming it was simply Gay porn and he was prosecuted over softcore images in unprotected areas... bit more to it than that.

The operation Ore Article was very misleading.... He was nothing to do with it as far as I know, they simply conected his name with that article because they did the usual shit of connecting porn with cp porn.

His images were in unprotected areas, but it was not softcore, and it's still up.

His first page has young looking male sucking off another guy.
The preview tour pages contained:- scat, beast and torture images. All of which are a big no way here.

IDINTERNET
Check the BBFC R18 guidelines. S&M on the lines of pain or physical abuse are also a stay well clear of topic. Same with piss., fisting etc....


SARAH_WEBINC
You get Film4Extreme don't you? That moive I was on about is on tonight. "Salo or 120 Days in Sodom", starts around 12.30 Saturday night... based on a Marquis De Sade book and it's set in Italy. That's the one with all the perversities in... Watch it if you can and then give me your verdict on the UK board.... it's frigging sick.

UK law is still very strick on porn, but we must all aggree some standard international laws for the net need to be laid! this will make the whole thing allot better!

Thsi guy was clearly in the wrong, but for gods sake operation ore wasnt relevant to him atall! that was a hole new issue from what I can see

Pissing is featured in some of the Barely Legal series I have, which is R18. I have books where a large amount of the pages contain pissing or fisting.

General laws apply to off the shelf materials, and as you point out -- common sense applies to webmasters, but there are absolutely no guidelines concerning Internet publication. Anyone could be busted for "general hardcore" at any time, regardless of laws for magazines and video. It's a problem.

It's not only the obviously shady things that are a problem. Internal cumshots and DP are nothing more than vanilla for the average webmaster. But it may be a completely different matter for a crooked choirboy abusing holier than thou judge.

IDINTERNET

Yeah I agree...

Even though you are R18, BBFC compliant... it still doesn't mean you can't be busted for obscenity... which is where this gets really stupid.

As you said, there are no Internet guidelines as such... but the R18 guidelines are as close as we are going to get for now, and are at least something to base sites on until there is a relevant and recent case history. As far as I am aware, there isn't any recent case in UK regarding the Internet, which has not involved animals, children, torture (self inflicted included) and scat.

This was interesting though, taken from the BBFC site under R18-

"activity which is degrading or dehumanising (examples include the portrayal of bestiality, necrophilia, defecation, urolagnia)."

Accoding to that you should not have obtained R18 classification on your Barely Legal Series if it featured pissing because "urolagnia" relates to someone who is sexually stimulated at the sight of someone urinating, not necessarily urinating on a person.

There is simply no way would I deal with any sites containing piss, extreme bondage or fisting.

This is what the BBFC says is not allowed:-

any material which is in breach of the criminal law.
material (including dialogue) likely to encourage an interest in abusive sexual activity (e.g., paedophilia, incest) which may include depictions involving adults role-playing as non-adults.
the portrayal of any sexual activity, whether real or simulated, which involves lack of consent.
the infliction of pain or physical harm, real or (in a sexual context) simulated. Some allowance may be made for mild consensual activity.
any sexual threats or humiliation which do not form part of a clearly consenting role-playing game.
the use of any form of physical restraint which prevents participants from withdrawing consent, for example, ball gags.
penetration by any object likely to cause actual harm or associated with violence.
activity which is degrading or dehumanising (examples include the portrayal of bestiality, necrophilia, defecation, urolagnia).

The following content, subject to the above, may be permitted

aroused genitalia
masturbation
oral-genital contact including kissing, licking and sucking
penetration by finger, penis, tongue, vibrator or dildo
non-harmful fetish material
group sexual activity
ejaculation and semen

These guidelines make no distinction between heterosexual and homosexual activity.


I agree though, something in black and white from our government would clarify a lot for us in this business. I prefer working well within the boundaries.

Dang , I'm going out tonight..I will have to to remember to look out for it if they repeat it (and film 4 usually does). Bugger, nothing good on all week then the one day I go out it on.

Guys..did I read correctly that this all happened 2000 - 2001..??
It's now 2003....

yup and in 2003 we still don't know where we stand...especially with the climate here over the past week. Remeber, Townsend is just a drop in the British ocean and the sharks are out looking for blood.

ah there is a huge list of brittish celebs who have been had for simular porn activaty over the last few years, its rediculas how many when you think about it!

2001-02 but was only recently jailed i think

Anyone else notice the bit about him able to keep the money, now thats a bit silly lol


Prison isnt a huge punishment if your earning money from the intrest every day your there lol :1orglaugh

Holy Shnikes

i just read in the standard paper about another guy arested for fraudulant credit card earnings through his sponsor, he had many signups which had attempted chargebacks, the credit companys were suspicious expecially when they realised every single one came from the same town in holland, everyone been buying things in one specific shop! they had been ripping numbers, one or two they could of got away with but over 2000 LOL!!!

:glugglug