• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

US Government shuts down Rotten.com websites

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

nitewulf

Member
good, about time. i dont care about freedom of speech violations, some things need to be filtered out without debates.
 
D

Diablos

Member
I'm glad Rotten.com is going offline, however, this new revision to the law could really fuck over a lot of websites that don't deserve to share the same fate.

Waychel: But couldn't this law be abused to the point where they could shut down a blog, such as this one - http://www.livejournal.com/users/scyph/141142.html#cutid1 - because the pictures included don't belong to any "credible source that was documented" or some bullshit like that?
 
W

Waychel

Banned
I don't see any pornographic images there. The record keeping requirements of §2257 apply to images of a sexual or pornographic nature.

§2257
(a) Whoever produces any book, magazine, periodical, film, videotape, or other matter which—

(1) contains one or more visual depictions made after November 1, 1990 of actual sexually explicit conduct; and
(2) is produced in whole or in part with materials which have been mailed or shipped in interstate or foreign commerce, or is shipped or transported or is intended for shipment or transportation in interstate or foreign commerce;

shall create and maintain individually identifiable records pertaining to every performer portrayed in such a visual depiction.
Click to expand...
 
fse

fse

Member
oh come on, I bet you all visited rotten.com many times. some funny shit if you like that stuff.
 
R

RonaldoSan

Member
Braveheart.jpg


NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
 
V

Vieo

Member
Hey, wasn't there a news story a while back that said pornographic sites will be getting their own address extension (for example, .gov .com .org .ca) ? Maybe it's part of a bigger plan to push them over to that new extension so it's easier to block out stuff you don't want to see.
 
L

Lemurnator

Banned
Agent Dormer said:
3 more years... 3 more years. :/
Click to expand...

If you think this is going to end in 3 years than you and everyone else is sadly mistaken.

Just one person can't fuck up an entire country. It takes an entire administration, members of congress, supreme court judges, to do that. What the President says doesn't just go, it has to get passed down the line to get approved.

Which proves that the entire government is fucked, since the majority obviously sides with him.

If I were in a position above the president, I'd call for a good old fashioned Stalinist purge. This country needs an enema.
 
N

Ninja Scooter

Member
Vieo said:
Hey, wasn't there a news story a while back that said pornographic sites will be getting their own address extension (for example, .gov .com .org .ca) ? Maybe it's part of a bigger plan to push them over to that new extension so it's easier to block out stuff you don't want to see.
Click to expand...

.fap
 
H

HokieJoe

Member
Waychel said:
The fact of the matter is that it is both ridiculous and uneconomical to expect the US government to conduct investigation into every website that it suspects of containing pornographic material involving minors. After all, many women naturally look younger than their age (I'm one of them) and this can complicate matters further when the porn itself is actually advertised as having "teen" actresses and being lolita.

However, as a result of book keeping records being required pursuant to §2257, these websites can easily and expediently exonerate themselves by providing documentation or proof of an actress/model's age by providing sources for the material. So, not only does this law protect many providers of pornography from undue suspicion, but it allows investigators to conduct their searches where they matter regarding the increasing, unregulated rise of underage actors in pornography.

Child prostitution and pornography has been running rampant in states bordering the US-Mexico border (such as California and Texas) because minors are easily smuggled in from Mexico and forced into these trades like modern day slaves. When it comes to the Internet, tracking this activity alone is an incredible task; especially when it comes to finding it's source. This isn't about censorship so much as making the process of investigating these crimes easier for all involved.

Personally, I also fail to see why Rotten.com should be exempt from the same requirements that normal businesses online must adhere to. All that this law asks for is for pornography websites to take the responsibility of regulating themselves. That isn't censorship, but protecting the rights of whomever may be involved in the material being posted; especially in the consideration of minors.
Click to expand...


I agree completely. There are some sick fucks out there that will do anything- including production or posting of child pornography, for the sake of the almighty $.
 
F

FINALFANTASYDOG

Member
http://www.boingboing.net/2005/06/22/rottencom_our_gaping.html said:
In terms of the bookkeeping requirements for Adult film distributors -- each distributor has to keep records on site. That includes social security numbers, driver license scans and other personal information
Click to expand...

It seems to me if you are a video store that rents or sells the brown bunny a more then legitimate film(although probably not a film that is in the category of "good") that has what amounts to a porn scene in it, then you are going to have to keep all that information about Hollywood actors, which I somehow just don't think they would appreciate giving out.

Not to mention it seems just a tad bit dangerous giving social security numbers and real identity info of adult film stars (including adress) to every possible nutball that does distribution of adult films
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Human cost of conspiracy theories.
2
69
8K
Raonak replied
  • Locked
Chomsky on US Empire, Decimating Public Programs, HealthCare, N.Korea & Russian Hacks
2 3
114
14K
ThoseDeafMutes replied
Howard Chaykin's 'Divided States of Hysteria' faces backlash for provocative imagery.
36
10K
Spike Spiegel replied
  • Locked
Verge: The history of moderation on social media, and how much power it has on speech
7
2K
wildfire replied
  • Locked
Seymour Hersh: Infighting among JCS and CIA and Obama's stance on Assad.
33
6K
Guileless replied
Top Bottom