FEDERAL OBSCENITY LAW????

[Cleo]

I also think 18 is too young but what do I know.

[SirMoby]

Originally Posted by Tommy

do you realy feel that your just a distributer ???
your not selling some prepackaged goods that comes sealed in plastic

Is what I feel the issue?

Phillip Morris buys tobacco, paper, ink, filters and a huge amount of other goods and then producers the product known as cigarettes. You’ll find a similar process for everything that can be purchased. They do NOT need to ensure that any of those goods were produced legally.

Why should the adult industry have different laws then all others?

[Tommy]

scratch that.. it was a bad example

[Tommy]

you said yourself that you feel you have a moral obligation to make sure the models you are using are 18

dont you feel everyone has that same moral obligation and when you think about it this industry has a lot of dirt bags in it and a LOT of content that is coming from very poor countries

how many webmasters will take free content from sponsors that they never heard of before nor do they know anything about the people that run that program

and how many us content providers still to this day arent 2257 compiant

even with the law passed your still having problems getting ids

why is that ???

[SirMoby]

Originally Posted by Tommy

scratch that.. it was a bad example

Tommy, you know I love you but they're ALL bad examples because we’re putting moral values on the products that are being produced in the adult industry.

My morals are my own so should they be forced onto others? My morals were often at conflict when I worked for well respected corporations in well respected businesses. There are incredible scum in this business but does that means that there is a higher percentage in this business then there is in others? After spending 2 decades in the well respected corporate world I can honestly say that today I’m working with business partners that have higher moral values then I did before.

Still morals are not laws.

I CHALLENGE ANYONE TO COME UP WITH A CONSTITUTIONAL ARGUMENT ON WHY A DISTRIBUTOR OF PORNOGRAPHIC IMAGES SHOULD HAVE THEIR SUPPLY CHAIN MORE HIGHLY REGULATED THEN WAL MART.



BTW – If I was purchasing hand dyed cloth from another country to make clothing for resell I would also feel that I have a moral obligation to ensure that the child or slave labor was not used in the process of making and delivery those products to me. Again that’s my own moral values and there is NO law that would require me to do that.

[tickler]

It is kinda of hard to classify what the normal WM actually does, but, producer really doesn't fit the bill. Distributor isn't quite right either because that would sorta imply actually moving stuff.

Maybe something artistic, more along the lines of how some music groups do sampling from other material.So I buy the content, and then organize, crop, chop, filter, morph, color, optomize and end up displaying it on a page. Yet the original content is still there somewhere.

[SirMoby]

Originally Posted by tickler

Maybe something artistic, more along the lines of how some music groups do sampling from other material.So I buy the content, and then organize, crop, chop, filter, morph, color, optomize and end up displaying it on a page. Yet the original content is still there somewhere.

The same logic applies to this scenerio. The artists creating the final product do NOT need to ensure that the sounds they're using for sampling did not break any child labor laws.

A painter is not responsible for the makers of the canvas, brushes and pigments.

The US Department of Defense is not responsible for the Malyasian companies making the chips that go into most computer systems.

A kosher deli purchases meat from a reliable source but they are not legally responsible if that producer of meat certifies something as kosher when it is not.

Compare it to any other business, remove your own emotional responce about nudity and suddenly it seems totally crazy to have secondary producers forced to keep this level of information.

[Useless]

Originally Posted by SirMoby

I CHALLENGE ANYONE TO COME UP WITH A CONSTITUTIONAL ARGUMENT ON WHY A DISTRIBUTOR OF PORNOGRAPHIC IMAGES SHOULD HAVE THEIR SUPPLY CHAIN MORE HIGHLY REGULATED THEN WAL MART.

WE OFFEND CHRISTIANS!!!

Sorry, I couldn't come up with anything other than that. |clown|