|
Party Boat posted:Quote this if filming your sex life suddenly became illegal Depends - which animal are you using?
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 16:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 04:26 |
|
|
Burqa King posted:Depends - which animal are you using? yer mam
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 16:55
|
|
|
Party Boat posted:Quote this if filming your sex life suddenly became illegal Squirting's not a choice.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 16:56
|
|
|
blunt posted:Squirting's not a choice. Showoff.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 16:57
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:So whats up with the new porn laws, UK? http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukia/2014/321/pdfs/ukia_20140321_en.pdf Abuse, rape, strangulation, getting pissed on, fisting and inserting things up the butt are now verboten but you can still have “gentle” spanking, whipping, caning or anything else done casually in 1970's Public School classrooms for some mysterious reason beyond our ken. Female Ejaculation is banned but Male Ejaculation isn't, presumably because they believe the first to be false advertising or outright fraud. It is a law that has reminded us all that out there somewhere are people who pay money for pornography. Weirdos.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 17:09
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:Are My Little Pony Porn and Animes illegal now? I think they always were but no one in government knows how to use the internet. Plus they're MP's. If they found out what furry porn was they'd ban it and hog it all to themselves. And that's not fair.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 17:10
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:Are My Little Pony Porn and Animes illegal now? Have been for ages I'm pretty sure. I wonder if anyone's ever done a breakdown of all pornography by type and content. It'd be interesting to see what percentage is "two consenting adults do missionary under the covers with the lights off", because I'm pretty sure that and a gently rocking car with fogged up windows are all that's legal. e/ wait is depiction of illegal sex acts illegal? Scratch the car if so, unless it's in somebody's garage 
Renaissance Robot fucked around with this message at 17:16 on Dec 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 17:10
|
|
|
Fans posted:Female Ejaculation is banned but Male Ejaculation isn't, presumably because they believe the first to be false advertising or outright fraud.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 17:12
|
|
|
Renaissance Robot posted:Have been for ages I'm pretty sure. pornhub put their search data up online in a work safe format somewhere, I think that's as close as you'll get.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 17:17
|
|
|
Fans posted:It is a law that has reminded us all that out there somewhere are people who pay money for pornography. Weirdos. I was under the impression it'd also apply to content viewed/consumed online? Would seem a bit ineffective otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 17:27
|
|
|
SkySteak posted:I was under the impression it'd also apply to content viewed/consumed online? Would seem a bit ineffective otherwise. I've effortposted about this exact subject at least three times now and (like everything else I effortpost about) nobody seems to give a poo poo So I'll noeffortpost instead. There are no new porn laws. You're all loving idiots. HTH.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 17:31
|
|
|
SkySteak posted:Would seem a bit ineffective otherwise. Nothing unusual then.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 17:33
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:I've effortposted about this exact subject at least three times now and (like everything else I effortpost about) nobody seems to give a poo poo Would you be so kind to link the most recent then? I've havent seen it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 17:37
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:I've effortposted about this exact subject at least three times now and (like everything else I effortpost about) nobody seems to give a poo poo *drags 21GB of.mkvs out of Recycle Bin*
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
Porn rage
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 17:44
|
|
|
SkySteak posted:Would you be so kind to link the most recent then? I've havent seen it. It was a while ago, when the new regulations came up. Basically the summary version is - the law on obscenity in this country is 50 years old and, apart from a few facelifts for good or ill (R18 certificates, "extreme pornography") is basically never going to be changed because it's just too much of a political hot potato and it's nothing any politician wants to put their reputaiton on the line for. All that's happened is that they've closed a particular grey area/loophole in the laws. The ambiguity in that current law seemed to suggest that either no obscene material served from a host in the UK could ever be legal, or that literally everything (that didn't involve children, animals, dead bodies, or certain other things covered under other laws) was legal, or possibly that the R18 certificate and it's restrictions applied but only if the servers were inside a licensed sex shop. Like I say, the law is an utter mess on this. All they've done is take the path of least resistance and said if it's R18 certified material, served from a UK host, that some form of age verification must be in place before users can access it. It DOES NOT (as some would have you believe) make it an offence to send a video of your dick to someone else without getting BBFC approval beforehand, just like the OPA never made Polaroids of your mum's tits illegal.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 17:50
|
|
|
Renaissance Robot posted:Have been for ages I'm pretty sure. Of course they have, data analysis of tube sites is very valuable as market research. It's not going to be published of course.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 17:57
|
|
|
The whole thing is bizarre. According to them most female ejaculation videos are actually just piss so they fall under the water sports ban (did I just type that). I thought we could at least laugh at the backwards aussies over this sort of thing but obviously not.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 18:07
|
|
|
Jippa posted:The whole thing is bizarre. According to them most female ejaculation videos are actually just piss so they fall under the water sports ban (did I just type that). Yeah, the BBFC are really weird and anachronistic, but there's almost no country that doesn't have at least one weird sexual censorship thing on the books somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 18:10
|
|
|
How can we square the "these are not new laws" claim with this: http://obscenitylawyer.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/the-following-content-is-not-acceptable.html Which is a post from a lawyer who specialises in exactly this kind of case, and which begins: quote:The following content is not acceptable from the 1st December 2014 *Only if you penetrate with all five digits beyond the knuckle. If you don't go beyond the knuckle then you can use any number of fingers on two or more (!) hands and it's all fine. Apparently.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 18:16
|
|
|
Also, that post finishes by wondering if this is a tightening-up of the law in preparation for another round of internet filtering:quote:Of particular concern in terms of loss of freedom is the underlying intent to allow undesirable foreign websites to be blocked under UK ISP’s filtering systems. This has immeasurable implications on freedom of information and net neutrality.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 18:19
|
|
|
ronya posted:... that's why I went on to provide the bases for that speculation. You so didn't
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 18:21
|
|
|
Zephro posted:How can we square the "these are not new laws" claim with this: *Some sites have managed to claim that the nature of their service (individual streaming**) is completely different to both television and retail sale and are so still not covered by the new standard. This seems to have been accepted for the time being. **Watersports pun here.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 18:24
|
|
|
Zephro posted:How can we square the "these are not new laws" claim with this: Hmm, why would someone who specialises in obscenity law want to hype up a change in obscenity law? The point is that nobody in the UK is streaming this content (partially because of the former ambiguity, but mostly just because it's way cheaper to host it elsewhere and avoid all the licensed sex shop bullshit you have to jump through to sell porn in the UK anyway). Just o reiterate that - nobody is selling porn from UK hosts now, because to do so you have to be a licensed sex shop and go through massive amounts of hoops, whereas ten minutes work and a credit card and you can be streaming anything you want from any of the thousands of turnkey companies that exist for exactly that purpose. It's like complaining that the CAA have extended airworthiness certification to spacecraft. Sure it's probably going to stop any new moon shots (possibly also illegal under these regulations) being launched from Croydon but nobody was actually going to try it anyway and if they did they'd use one of the established providers in the US or Russia. The only way this situation was going to get properly fixed would be replacement of OPA (and all the other patchwork of laws on the subject) with something rewritten from scratch and that's just never going to happen.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 18:28
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEXTkQA5YGI
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 18:30
|
|
|
The blog post is saying that VOD content will be regulated as if it's an adult film, with an R18 classification. It's saying that's a more draconian standard of regulation than the one specified in the OPA. So it suggests that they're going further than applying the OPA to the intertubes. They're applying the BBFC's own internal standards instead, which is more than they needed to do. Or is that wrong?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 18:45
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:There are no new porn laws. Sorry. New Porn Amendment to current regulatory law that makes things that were formerly legal to do in the UK now illegal to do in the UK. It's not a new law, even though amendments that make things illegal that were formerly legal are usually referred to in common parlance as a "New Law" goddamnedtwisto posted:The point is that nobody in the UK is streaming this content (partially because of the former ambiguity, but mostly just because it's way cheaper to host it elsewhere and avoid all the licensed sex shop bullshit you have to jump through to sell porn in the UK anyway). Just o reiterate that - nobody is selling porn from UK hosts now, because to do so you have to be a licensed sex shop and go through massive amounts of hoops, whereas ten minutes work and a credit card and you can be streaming anything you want from any of the thousands of turnkey companies that exist for exactly that purpose. It doesn't just affect sellers, people who make porn in the UK for the internet are now under the regulation and they can't really go to Turkey to get around it. Here's some more things now illegal to film for the internet in Britain. Facesitting Enjoying Vomiting or Vomiting during sex. Transparent Catheters to the mouth. Non-transparent ones are fine! Fisting Any content which might "Outrage the public decency". So sex outdoors basically. Believable forced sex at gunpoint. Unbelievable forced sex at gunpoint is apparently okay. Somehow. Full Bondage. An unacceptable amount of ballbusting. OFCOM will review clips to check. That's someone's actual job. Power Tools. Purpose designed loving machines are okay though, don't panic. I wussed out from reading more, it only got more weird.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 19:03
|
|
|
Fans posted:Sorry. New Porn Amendment to current regulatory law that makes things that were formerly legal to do in the UK now illegal to do in the UK. It's not a new law, even though amendments that make things illegal that were formerly legal are usually referred to in common parlance as a "New Law" Nope, you're just wrong. Those things you've listed there are from the BBFC restrictions on R18 content. The new regulation doesn't cover production. There are no laws covering porn production in the UK apart from those affecting any other sexual act.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 19:09
|
|
|
quote:An unacceptable amount of ballbusting. OFCOM will review clips to check. That's someone's actual job. I've always wondered exactly who it is that would get the pr0n assignment. Is it some greasy creep who actually gets off on it? Some SJW cultist who's convinced herself that she's smashing Victorian patriarchy with 2girls1cup? Is it an unsubtle indication to a guy swinging the lead that he may wish to consider his retirement? Or is being told to go to Office P the way civil servants haze some hapless newbie?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 19:27
|
|
|
kapparomeo posted:I've always wondered exactly who it is that would get the pr0n assignment. Is it some greasy creep who actually gets off on it? Some SJW cultist who's convinced herself that she's smashing Victorian patriarchy with 2girls1cup? Is it an unsubtle indication to a guy swinging the lead that he may wish to consider his retirement? Or is being told to go to Office P the way civil servants haze some hapless newbie? it's your mum
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 19:29
|
|
|
Who exactly thought this was important and how do they think the country will now improve? Was this unacceptable porn encouraging foreigners? Was it making people claim benefits because they'd been in transparant-catheter-facesitting-fisting accidents? I have to give them some credit as they're making sure I keep on top of things technology and software wise because when the censorship wall finally drops and they're filtering all kinds of innocuous poo poo i'm getting around it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 19:31
|
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:Who exactly thought this was important and how do they think the country will now improve? Was this unacceptable porn encouraging foreigners? Was it making people claim benefits because they'd been in transparant-catheter-facesitting-fisting accidents? I have to give them some credit as they're making sure I keep on top of things technology and software wise because when the censorship wall finally drops and they're filtering all kinds of innocuous poo poo i'm getting around it. I suspect its more "Think of the Children" oriented stuff.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
Renaissance Robot posted:e/ wait is depiction of illegal sex acts illegal? Scratch the car if so, unless it's in somebody's garage Depiction of legal sex acts can be illegal - see for example two consenting 17 year olds making a blue movie.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
Fans posted:Here's some more things now illegal to film for the internet in Britain. Does this one come with an official definition? I would love to know when an act crosses the line from partial bondage to TOTAL bondage. What if a finger can still wiggle about?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 19:34
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:Nope, you're just wrong. Those things you've listed there are from the BBFC restrictions on R18 content. The new regulation doesn't cover production. There are no laws covering porn production in the UK apart from those affecting any other sexual act. I guess "Illegal to film" wasn't right to say, you can film it of course it just wouldn't be legal to air. But to say it doesn't affect production at all doesn't seem right. quote:Porn studios in the UK have to submit their DVDs to a certification body to receive an R18 rating. That comes from the same censorship body that oversees Hollywood movie releases in the UK: The British Board of Film Classification. The main change that has taken place is that the BBFC is now going to require paid-for online porn to adhere to the same guidelines as DVDs. quote:Who does this affect? KKKlean Energy posted:Does this one come with an official definition? I would love to know when an act crosses the line from partial bondage to TOTAL bondage. What if a finger can still wiggle about? It does! All limbs bound and gagged is full bondage. Though you can do it if the scene establishes a safe signal beforehand. How you give that signal while all your limbs are bound and gagged I don't know, for I am a delicate flower who thinks taking the socks off is getting saucy. Fans fucked around with this message at 19:44 on Dec 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 19:41
|
|
|
KKKlean Energy posted:Does this one come with an official definition? I would love to know when an act crosses the line from partial bondage to TOTAL bondage. What if a finger can still wiggle about?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 19:50
|
|
|
UKMT December: Repeal the porn laws
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 19:52
|
|
|
Semprini posted:UKMT December: Repeal the porn laws
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
Fans posted:How you give that signal while all your limbs are bound and gagged I don't know, for I am a delicate flower who thinks taking the socks off is getting saucy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 19:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 04:26 |
|
|
Fans posted:I guess "Illegal to film" wasn't right to say, you can film it of course it just wouldn't be legal to air. But to say it doesn't affect production at all doesn't seem right. That's just sloppy phrasing and/or lovely journalism. UK production companies do not, and never have had to, submit content to the BBFC. Anyone wishing to commercially distribute any filmed entertainment (porn or not) in the UK, however, does (except where exempt). (Anyone worried this will lead to censorship of non-UK porn sites doeesn't have to worry - importation for personal use is also perfectly legal except where otherwise illegal (child porn, etc)). There is nothing in the regulation, and noting in the OPA or the DRA or any other UK law that restricts what people can film between consenting adults *beyond what two consenting adults are allowed to do if there's no camera there (this isn't strictly true, there are a couple of edge cases of which 16- and 17-year-old participants are the most obvious, but it's infinitely more true than the clickbait that you're citing)
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 20:05
|
|