[info]nosselinfea in [info]07refugees

Demands for age verification legally unconstitutional

an article in techcrunch today suggests that demands to prove age from websites hosting adult material are unconstitutional. This is likely to have an impact on LJ's plans to flag adult journals and demand proof of age to access them.

Posted on Oct. 24th, 2007 at 03:02 pm | | Leave a comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend

Comments


[info]aristoboule

Maybe I misread the article, but I think that it only affects performers (porn stars, models, etc.) that are shown or depicted on a site, not the people accessing them. In other words, proof of age or a declaration of age may still be required for viewers to access such sites. I could be wrong, but that's my interpretation of it.
Posted on Oct. 24th, 2007 03:42 pm (UTC) | | Thread | Reply

[info]beccastareyes

That's what I got from it too. The article was mostly concerning itself with user-generated porn -- where the site members were both watching the porn and supplying it. Which could be relevant for the producers (writers, artists, etc.) of fanworks/original erotica on LJ, but not the reader/watcher. I don't know how it would affect fictional characters in porn.
Posted on Oct. 24th, 2007 04:03 pm (UTC) | | Parent | Reply

[info]ladybelz

Wonder what this would mean for Adultfanfiction.net. They have an age verifier in place that people have to see each time they want to access the side. Really annoying it is.
Posted on Oct. 24th, 2007 06:15 pm (UTC) | | Reply

[info]vincent_z

'Chilling effect' mitigated

This is a significant finding by the court.
Where this shall enable more legal erotica to be shared on the World-Wide Web is in a forum such as Newbie Nudes [NSFW] (and its gay affiliate NewBoy Nudes).

The mandatory requirement that everybody has to keep records of everybody who appears in an erotic image could very well have led to additional incidents of anti-erotica zealots requesting the ID of everybody and anybody on an “amateur” erotica webhost in order to harass those persons in real life.

So the underlying intent of this law was not to prevent another Traci Lords incident, but to discourage you or I from creating our own erotica and placing it on the World-Wide Web. Because what if our erotica were more pleasing and satisfying than that which is so commonly found out here? (And we were not asking any money for it?)

Posted on Oct. 26th, 2007 07:57 am (UTC) | | Thread | Reply

[info]lady_ganesh

Re: 'Chilling effect' mitigated

Oh, it's the porn ruling? Yeah, I didn't think it would apply either.
Posted on Oct. 27th, 2007 02:13 am (UTC) | | Parent | Reply

[info]lady_ganesh

Shiny!
Posted on Oct. 27th, 2007 02:10 am (UTC) | | Reply