CJ,

Actually in the U.S. the rules for brick and mortar are just as convoluted as those for the internet. Obscenity in brick and mortar has been a local issue, not a federal one. They leave it to the states and often even the local municipalities to decide what they'll tolerate. This is the so-called "community standards".

What is perfectly acceptable in L.A. and sold at every video store, might get you shut down in Alabama and the heart of the bible belt.

Although the laws have not changed, what is tolerated changes depending on who is in office locally. Both Atlanta and New York are excellent examples.

Back in the early 80's smut was not tolerated at all, there were prosecutors in office who were on a mission and they shut down every adult bookstore. You couldn't get anything stronger than penthouse and only "cable versions" of video. They even prosecuted Larry Flynt for distributing Hustler here....it was at his trial in Lawrenceville, GA (a suburb now) that he was shot and paralyzed.

It is only in the last 10 years or so that it hasn't become somewhat easy to go buy or rent a hardcore video in Atlanta.

NYC on the other hand has kinda gone the other way. 10 years ago you could buy pretty much anything you wanted around 42nd street. That was the first place I ever saw "Naughty Nuns & Nazis #45" out on the shelf in plain view. Then Mayor Rudy cleaned it up....all this happened local.

Biggy, obviously I did miss your point :P

I understand the point you are trying to make now ... you think everyone here will be fucked if COPA is passed and that we are falsely excited. I disagree.

Australia has had these similar laws in place for years ........... look around, there's no less aussie pornographers than there were before the laws were passed, more if anything. We are just, as a whole, used to the process being more difficult.

You use the example that oprano would be affected ...

I don't see how .... its easy to block the board so that only registered members can browse it. The members can be informed of the changes via email so they know where to login. New members by referral only. I think that's what we were trying to achieve all along before ... ya know.

What's the problem with this? I see it as an improvement ...

And as for our porn subscription sites, common sense goes a long way. Think about what is on your tour, & if that is acceptable on TV at 9pm ... if its not, why are you publishing it in a place children can find it anyway?

ps, I don't see anything BUT opinions posted here dude so please don't stop with this discussion. we are all guessing ...

I found an interesting phenomenon recently...

I've been submitting to non-nude TGP's and my ratios are at 1999 levels, I'm 1:160 whereas I had gotten complacent with 1:500 on a good day and 1:1000 on a bad day.

I won't give away all of the places I submitted because I don't want the secret to get out, but amazing how much better conversions are on a gallery featuring teasing but no nudity....

HP, I see where you are coming from but the example you used should answer most of your own points ...

Naughty Nuns & Nazis #45

As an industry we have become saturated with obscenity to the point that we can't tell where the line is anymore ... when this happens, the law usually cracks down hard for a while then softens.

Here's a simple question ...

Do you think its acceptable to put an advertisement on TV at any time of the day or night with no pre warning for Naughty Nuns & Nazi's with a pic of a nun pulling her cheeks apart & saying "Watch these Nazi's fuck these nuns up the ass and pop their christian cherries"?

If the answer is NO, then how can it be unreasonable to attempt to stop it online, whether the solution is a perfect one or not?

And if the answer is YES, good luck in court :biglaugh:

While no 2 people can agree on what the definition of obscene is, *MOST* video stores in the brick and mortar world don't stock material even half as offensive as what we provide online. And of those that do, how many cases do you see brought to trial? Or even cases where legal action is taken? I could count the ones I remember on 1 hand ...

Nuns and Nazis on TV? That depends on what channel they're watching. If it's on an adult channel, I have no problem with it. If it's on Nickelodeon, then that's a problem.

My entire philosophy dating back to the BBS days has been that I dont want anyone to accidently see a titty. I have warning pages on ALL of my sites, always have. I also put in meta tags to declare the pages as adult content so Netnanny, et al will deny access. To me it's due diligence.

The problem is when someone see's a titty when they're not expecting it. Look at the ruckus the Superbowl caused here in the U.S. when Janet Jackson flipped her fun bag out for everyone to see. That was a surprise and there were families viewing who had no interest in seeing her tah tahs.

I have no sympathy for the guys like wuzzisface with whitehouse.gov or spamming lists with grannies and 10 year olds in it with full page ads with double penetration showing.

Lack of simple common sense is what basically invites the government into your backyard.

Again, the US government and court system seems to think it has control of the internet - nothing could be further from the truth. They pass a spam law, and all the spammers move offshore and seemingly DOUBLE the amount of spam they are sending. COPA is no different, it will just drive things offshore.

I am not sure that a program being in the US would be forbidden from accepting Euro based TGP traffic. I don't see the implication. The paysite is paying for visitors, not for the gallery itself. They are not paying for advertising, they are paying commissions on sales.

I haven't read COPA in a long time, but I didn't see how this could work out properly. Again, US laws written in total ignorance of the world force that the internet has become.

As for filtering, I think you would see ISPs by the boatload complaining and launching lawsuits left and right to stop this type of thing. There is no way they could be capable of blocking "harmful to minors" material without seriously impeding the use of the net by adults. Further, as minors cannot enter into a service agreement for the internet, no ISP (except schools that provide internet access to minors) should be made subject to any attempt to block porn. Adults should be free to roam as they please. Choosing to go (electronically) into a dirty book store in Amsterdam shouldn't be any different in real life or on the net.

I think you will see this one shot down again, on the grounds of being way to over reaching, that it would restrict valid free speech. That 1st amendment thing covers a ton of ground.

I think this was all done to create a new Bush "protect children from the internet initiative" for the campaign trail, where he can say "I will work with the congress, the house, my people, and the best educated legal minds to find a way to stop our children from being blasted by obscene pornographic materials. The Supreme Court has ruled against all attempts so far, but we will succeed because the american people want this!"

Alex

Exactly!! ... there are channels on TV which separate content and rate it based on the target audience. We don't have that online.

Sites which redirect url's like whitehouse.com, or worse, misspells of children's brands to porn are the equivalent of putting a porno add on nickelodeon TV ... if it happened on TV, *someone* would be held responsible, even if it isn't within their control.

I was thinking of this example also ... while its just a tit, and the outcry was rediculous ... the whole point is choice. If that choice is taken away from parents, our argument of 'its the parents responsibility' is completely useless.

Alex, the same principal applies for this:

What about if someone comes out of the adult bookstore, grabs you and drags you inside and shoves a copy of 'tight assed trannies' in your face? Should the store be allowed to do that?

Our arguments which revolve around "Parents should have the choice" are completely useless ... because many pornographers take away the parents choice just by where & how we publish our sites. We all got cocky, we all got used to no rules, now we are going to have to pay for it.

cj, I don't disagree with you - but writing rules that effectively limit free speech to get rid of these issues is just not going to work out. There are any number of laws and current SC judgements that prevent porn from being distributed to minors. They don't enforce them. They just write more totally unenforcable laws and try to make it look like they did their jobs.

that being said, I hope the spyware law passes and is actually enforced. I would love to see the people using security holes to install this stuff arrested and given over to Bubba to be his bitch for a few years in the old butt banging federal prison.

Gonzo: want to give Kevin and his friends something else to work on? how about replacing the current stupid easily corrupted email system with something that is 100% traceable, and does not permit the volumes that spam required to make money? I have some ideas for them if they are interested.

Perhaps the US should pass a law to forbid the use of SMPT mail systems. That might help.

Alex

Well get right on that Alex.... right after you tell me where to send the wire instructions for the first payment of 10K.

Free Kevin Mitnick was a political statement not a marketing one!

Sorry Gonzo, I take all slogans to be marketing!

let me call AOl and earthlink and see if they have some extra coin lying around.

Alex

Oversimplification time (basically because I don't feel like explaining it and it's been covered well here)

My feeling is if you're against COPA you are also against obscene profits such as we experienced from 1997-2001

Take it off shore, can someone clue me where most major data centers are?

Can you look at Hustler in a local bookstore without a brown wrapper?

It's not a removal of free speech, it's protecting minors from access to adult materials AND MAKING MORE MONEY!!!!!

Where does it state in any US government docs that free speech protect the rights of minors to see PUSSY??????

Let them cop Dad's Playboy like generations before


Edit - for spelling

Vick,

are you in the US? If this gets approved, I hope you plan on relocating. otherwise, I'm curious to how you are are going to sell onyourknees.com and schoolgirlish.com without violating. You wouldn't be able to post any other obscene images on your tour, or use any obscene "text".. try describing your site without using the words "blowjob" "cum" maybe even "sex" and "teen"

[/b][/quote]
Hey Biggy - I have no plans or relocating and I have every plan to use this to my fullest advantage to increase profits, sorry if you can't see that.

Yes there are challenges that may never be overcome with enforcing this law but even no full nudity on tours would be excellent!!! You have to know marketing which many in this business have no clue about

Let's leave my business to me and you worry about your's

Sound good B)

If we're running with TV analogies...which doesn't exactly work....the V-Chip type solution isn't bad. Require sites to be self-rated via meta-tags if they're adult and put the control in the parents' hands which is where it belongs.