Vivid says no to porn

[TheEnforcer]

Just what I thought. You advocate no reponsibility at all for webmasters. You want a special class of people who have to take no responsibility for their actions at all. It's no wonder many politicians and parents can't stand this business when they see an attitude that kids should be able to see blowjobs, fisting, piss scenes, anal, double penetration, bukakke and more because some teens have already had sex and what their parents think doesn't matter. And you wonder why politicians and parents hate this business?

So tell me, when are you gonna start fighting for allowing the selling and showing of porn to kids at brick and mortar shops? If webmasters can show and sell porn to minors without any responsibility to keep them off their sites on the web, well hell, why shouldn't they be able to do so at brick and mortar stores too? It's the same 1st amendment. It's not like there is one 1st amendment for webmasters and one for offline shop owners, or is there according to you? So, please tell me when your firm is going to fight for offline sex shops to be able to let kids look at and sell to minors in their stores with no responsibilities at all?

Oh and while you are correct that governments cannot force countires into using tags they can try and coerce and incentivise them to do so in a variety of ways.

[Toby]

While we're talking realities...

...any tagging system, be it voluntary or mandatory, is only going to keep those out that accidentally click links to porn sites. Any sexually curious teenager who is deliberately trying to find porn online is going to be more than capable of circumventing any software system implemented.

[pornlaw]

So tell me, when are you gonna start fighting for allowing the selling and showing of porn to kids at brick and mortar shops?

As soon as I find a client that wants to take that position and has enough money to fund the litigation. I can certainly use the arguments you have raised that brick and mortar owners are unfairly and unconstitutionally segregated under the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process and Equal Protection clauses.

I think you are on to something here.

Do you know of an owner that has been prosecuted for unknowingly allowing an underage child into their adult brick and mortar store or gentlemen's club that needs a lawyer ?



Michael

http://www.adultbizlaw.com

[TheEnforcer]

Originally Posted by pornlaw

As soon as I find a client that wants to take that position and has enough money to fund the litigation. I can certainly use the arguments you have raised that brick and mortar owners are unfairly and unconstitutionally segregated under the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process and Equal Protection clauses.

I think you are on to something here.

Do you know of an owner that has been prosecuted for unknowingly allowing an underage child into their adult brick and mortar store or gentlemen's club that needs a lawyer ?



Michael

http://www.adultbizlaw.com

Ok, now we might get somewhere. You had to qualify your statement by making sure that the owners of the brick and mortar unknowingly let minors in and buy stuff. There isn't an adult webmaster out there that doesn't know there are plenty of minors that visit their sites. So, what do they have in place that is the equivalent of an employee that cards patrons? Answer: nothing.

[tony404]

Originally Posted by TheEnforcer

Just what I thought. You advocate no reponsibility at all for webmasters. You want a special class of people who have to take no responsibility for their actions at all. It's no wonder many politicians and parents can't stand this business when they see an attitude that kids should be able to see blowjobs, fisting, piss scenes, anal, double penetration, bukakke and more because some teens have already had sex and what their parents think doesn't matter. And you wonder why politicians and parents hate this business?

So tell me, when are you gonna start fighting for allowing the selling and showing of porn to kids at brick and mortar shops? If webmasters can show and sell porn to minors without any responsibility to keep them off their sites on the web, well hell, why shouldn't they be able to do so at brick and mortar stores too? It's the same 1st amendment. It's not like there is one 1st amendment for webmasters and one for offline shop owners, or is there according to you? So, please tell me when your firm is going to fight for offline sex shops to be able to let kids look at and sell to minors in their stores with no responsibilities at all?

Oh and while you are correct that governments cannot force countires into using tags they can try and coerce and incentivise them to do so in a variety of ways.

You are so right,then when they start policing us people will have the balls to say why are they picking on us? lol

[ali25extreme]

I have problems with parents now days...can you tell?
..teach your kids, tell them how to be responsible and not click on the giant cock!