Extreme pornography law: they tried to sound sane but the law is mad

[ciphergoth]

emarkienna has published an analysis of the new extreme pornography law. They tried to sound sane and reasonable during the consultation process, but the law they've come up with is censorious madness. You can explicitly get three years inside for copying a segment from a legally-bought Hollywood movie into your porn folder.

Backlash are campaigning against the new law.

Aaaarghg.

Comments

Re: Because of the Internet

[surliminal.livejournal.com]

Ok this is my last comment too as I have to work.

Supose people get off on real videos of real women being raped. is that just about "taste" too? If not why not? Why don't we leave that issue, of regulating the rape of women , to the place where it happens and happily watch it?

Also to expect the country of server to regulate is disingenuous. Countries like Moldova and the FSU have more to worry about than cracking down on unfindable servers and lucrative porn traders who pay the right bribes.

Why is it me who has to give evidence that torture porn might be harmful? Why not you? We live in a world steeped, drenched in violence against and hatred of women. Shouldn't we start from a presumption that having less images out there of women being humiliated killed and raped for fun might be a good start?

In summary: Some values are actually more important than some percentage of the population getting its maximum rocks off, hard as it is to come across that sentiment on LJ.