Free Adult Dating Service

  • "Enter your caption here"
  • "Enter your caption here"

Is porn against the law

Unlawful distribution of images depicting states of nudity or specific sexual activities. If disclosed by electronic means, Class 4 felony. If threatens to disclose but does not disclose, Class 1 Misdemeanor. Arizona Revised Statutes, 13-1425

Unlawful distribution of sexual images or recordings, Class A misdemeanor  Arkansas Code 5-26-314  [effective July 22, 2015]

Disorderly Conduct Misdemeanor. California Penal Code 647(j)(4) , Sept 2014 amended version is here  

Posting a Private Image for Harassment (18-7-107) and Posting a Private Image for Pecuniary Gain (18-7-108). Class 1 Misdemeanor.  Colorado Revised Statutes 18-7-107 and 18-7-108.

An Act Concerning Invasions of Privacy: Unlawful Dissemination of an Intimate Image. Class A Misdemeanor. Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-189c .

Unless you happen to have been living on Mars for the last year or so, you probably know that this week ( January 26 to be precise) it will become a criminal offence (in England and Wales) to possess pictures that the government deems to be "extreme porn". You might also be aware of two diametrically opposed views on this legislation.

On the one hand, soothing words from Government and the Ministry of Justice suggest that the offence will catch only a very small number of people who possess the most abhorrent imagery. Cynics - including many lawyers who know a thing or two about obscenity - point out that the law as written is very broad, could catch a lot of quite ordinary stuff, and remind us of how laws, originally "intended" to focus on the most serious offences, end up being used far more widely. A good example is the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 , supposedly aimed at terrorists, and now used by local Councils to pursue individuals guilty of anti-social doggy poo.

Some of the advice in this article is therefore specific to the new extreme porn law: some is more general. It is not legal advice: if you want that, talk to a lawyer. It does set out some of the things you need to know, as well as some things you need to do now in order to make sure your story is not on the front pages of The Register in months to come.

First off, just what is the law? Various guides - including an official release from the Ministry of Justice - make it clear that pictures will fall foul of the new law if four components are present. The pic must be pornographic, or produced for sexual purposes. It must be realistic. It must contain certain specific imagery, including necrophilia, bestiality, activity depicting serious harm to breast, anus or genitals or life-threatening activity. Finally, it must be grossly offensive, as determined either by a jury or magistrate.

All those components must be there. Poster your walls with the most grotesque, the most blood-spattered out-takes from Saw or Hostel and unless someone can prove you actually get off on them, no prosecution could follow. That, of course, highlights one of the first of many question marks hovering over this legislation: is "produced for sexual purposes" defined relative to the motives of the originator of an image, or the motives of the person who downloads it to their hard-drive? Lawyers suspect the latter: so in fact, the out-takes in question might or might not fall foul of the law depending on your personal sexual tastes.

For many years, the Internet was the "final frontier," operating largely unregulated — in part because of the jurisdictional nightmare involved in trying to enforce laws when communications crossed not just state lines but also national boundaries. That was then; this is now. Legislation that affects the use of Internet-connected computers is springing up everywhere at the local, state and federal levels. You might be violating one of them without even knowing.

In this article, we'll take a look at some of the existing laws and some of the pending legislation that can influence how we use our computers and the Internet. Nothing in this article should be construed as legal advice; this is merely an overview of some of the legislation that's out there, how it has been interpreted by the courts (if applicable), and possible implications for computer users.

Most computer users have heard of this law, signed in 1998 by President Clinton, implementing two World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) treaties. The DMCA makes it a criminal offense to circumvent any kind of technological copy protection — even if you don't violate anyone's copyright in doing so. In other words, simply disabling the copy protection is a federal crime.

There are some exemptions, such as circumventing copy protection of programs that are in an obsolete format for the purpose of archiving or preservation. But in most cases, using any sort of anti-DRM program is illegal. This applies to all sorts of copy-protected files, including music, movies, and software. You can read a summary of the DMCA here .

If you're a techie who likes the challenge of trying to "crack" DRM, be aware that doing so — even if you don't make or distribute illegal copies of the copyrighted material — is against the law.

Unlawful distribution of images depicting states of nudity or specific sexual activities. If disclosed by electronic means, Class 4 felony. If threatens to disclose but does not disclose, Class 1 Misdemeanor. Arizona Revised Statutes, 13-1425

Unlawful distribution of sexual images or recordings, Class A misdemeanor  Arkansas Code 5-26-314  [effective July 22, 2015]

Disorderly Conduct Misdemeanor. California Penal Code 647(j)(4) , Sept 2014 amended version is here  

Posting a Private Image for Harassment (18-7-107) and Posting a Private Image for Pecuniary Gain (18-7-108). Class 1 Misdemeanor.  Colorado Revised Statutes 18-7-107 and 18-7-108.

An Act Concerning Invasions of Privacy: Unlawful Dissemination of an Intimate Image. Class A Misdemeanor. Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-189c .

Unless you happen to have been living on Mars for the last year or so, you probably know that this week ( January 26 to be precise) it will become a criminal offence (in England and Wales) to possess pictures that the government deems to be "extreme porn". You might also be aware of two diametrically opposed views on this legislation.

On the one hand, soothing words from Government and the Ministry of Justice suggest that the offence will catch only a very small number of people who possess the most abhorrent imagery. Cynics - including many lawyers who know a thing or two about obscenity - point out that the law as written is very broad, could catch a lot of quite ordinary stuff, and remind us of how laws, originally "intended" to focus on the most serious offences, end up being used far more widely. A good example is the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 , supposedly aimed at terrorists, and now used by local Councils to pursue individuals guilty of anti-social doggy poo.

Some of the advice in this article is therefore specific to the new extreme porn law: some is more general. It is not legal advice: if you want that, talk to a lawyer. It does set out some of the things you need to know, as well as some things you need to do now in order to make sure your story is not on the front pages of The Register in months to come.

First off, just what is the law? Various guides - including an official release from the Ministry of Justice - make it clear that pictures will fall foul of the new law if four components are present. The pic must be pornographic, or produced for sexual purposes. It must be realistic. It must contain certain specific imagery, including necrophilia, bestiality, activity depicting serious harm to breast, anus or genitals or life-threatening activity. Finally, it must be grossly offensive, as determined either by a jury or magistrate.

All those components must be there. Poster your walls with the most grotesque, the most blood-spattered out-takes from Saw or Hostel and unless someone can prove you actually get off on them, no prosecution could follow. That, of course, highlights one of the first of many question marks hovering over this legislation: is "produced for sexual purposes" defined relative to the motives of the originator of an image, or the motives of the person who downloads it to their hard-drive? Lawyers suspect the latter: so in fact, the out-takes in question might or might not fall foul of the law depending on your personal sexual tastes.

For many years, the Internet was the "final frontier," operating largely unregulated — in part because of the jurisdictional nightmare involved in trying to enforce laws when communications crossed not just state lines but also national boundaries. That was then; this is now. Legislation that affects the use of Internet-connected computers is springing up everywhere at the local, state and federal levels. You might be violating one of them without even knowing.

In this article, we'll take a look at some of the existing laws and some of the pending legislation that can influence how we use our computers and the Internet. Nothing in this article should be construed as legal advice; this is merely an overview of some of the legislation that's out there, how it has been interpreted by the courts (if applicable), and possible implications for computer users.

Most computer users have heard of this law, signed in 1998 by President Clinton, implementing two World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) treaties. The DMCA makes it a criminal offense to circumvent any kind of technological copy protection — even if you don't violate anyone's copyright in doing so. In other words, simply disabling the copy protection is a federal crime.

There are some exemptions, such as circumventing copy protection of programs that are in an obsolete format for the purpose of archiving or preservation. But in most cases, using any sort of anti-DRM program is illegal. This applies to all sorts of copy-protected files, including music, movies, and software. You can read a summary of the DMCA here .

If you're a techie who likes the challenge of trying to "crack" DRM, be aware that doing so — even if you don't make or distribute illegal copies of the copyrighted material — is against the law.

Protesters gathered in London to oppose the decision to ban various sex acts from UK-filmed online porn videos.

Paid-for online porn videos must now adhere to the same rules as content produced for sex shop-type videos.

Protest organiser Charlotte Rose said the "ludicrous" restrictions were a threat to freedom of expression.

The 2014 Audiovisual Media Services Regulation, which the government says will crack down on "harmful content", came into effect earlier this month.

It means acts that would not be classified as an R18 rating, in line with guidelines laid out by the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC), are prohibited.

Unlawful distribution of images depicting states of nudity or specific sexual activities. If disclosed by electronic means, Class 4 felony. If threatens to disclose but does not disclose, Class 1 Misdemeanor. Arizona Revised Statutes, 13-1425

Unlawful distribution of sexual images or recordings, Class A misdemeanor  Arkansas Code 5-26-314  [effective July 22, 2015]

Disorderly Conduct Misdemeanor. California Penal Code 647(j)(4) , Sept 2014 amended version is here  

Posting a Private Image for Harassment (18-7-107) and Posting a Private Image for Pecuniary Gain (18-7-108). Class 1 Misdemeanor.  Colorado Revised Statutes 18-7-107 and 18-7-108.

An Act Concerning Invasions of Privacy: Unlawful Dissemination of an Intimate Image. Class A Misdemeanor. Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-189c .

Unless you happen to have been living on Mars for the last year or so, you probably know that this week ( January 26 to be precise) it will become a criminal offence (in England and Wales) to possess pictures that the government deems to be "extreme porn". You might also be aware of two diametrically opposed views on this legislation.

On the one hand, soothing words from Government and the Ministry of Justice suggest that the offence will catch only a very small number of people who possess the most abhorrent imagery. Cynics - including many lawyers who know a thing or two about obscenity - point out that the law as written is very broad, could catch a lot of quite ordinary stuff, and remind us of how laws, originally "intended" to focus on the most serious offences, end up being used far more widely. A good example is the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 , supposedly aimed at terrorists, and now used by local Councils to pursue individuals guilty of anti-social doggy poo.

Some of the advice in this article is therefore specific to the new extreme porn law: some is more general. It is not legal advice: if you want that, talk to a lawyer. It does set out some of the things you need to know, as well as some things you need to do now in order to make sure your story is not on the front pages of The Register in months to come.

First off, just what is the law? Various guides - including an official release from the Ministry of Justice - make it clear that pictures will fall foul of the new law if four components are present. The pic must be pornographic, or produced for sexual purposes. It must be realistic. It must contain certain specific imagery, including necrophilia, bestiality, activity depicting serious harm to breast, anus or genitals or life-threatening activity. Finally, it must be grossly offensive, as determined either by a jury or magistrate.

All those components must be there. Poster your walls with the most grotesque, the most blood-spattered out-takes from Saw or Hostel and unless someone can prove you actually get off on them, no prosecution could follow. That, of course, highlights one of the first of many question marks hovering over this legislation: is "produced for sexual purposes" defined relative to the motives of the originator of an image, or the motives of the person who downloads it to their hard-drive? Lawyers suspect the latter: so in fact, the out-takes in question might or might not fall foul of the law depending on your personal sexual tastes.

Unlawful distribution of images depicting states of nudity or specific sexual activities. If disclosed by electronic means, Class 4 felony. If threatens to disclose but does not disclose, Class 1 Misdemeanor. Arizona Revised Statutes, 13-1425

Unlawful distribution of sexual images or recordings, Class A misdemeanor  Arkansas Code 5-26-314  [effective July 22, 2015]

Disorderly Conduct Misdemeanor. California Penal Code 647(j)(4) , Sept 2014 amended version is here  

Posting a Private Image for Harassment (18-7-107) and Posting a Private Image for Pecuniary Gain (18-7-108). Class 1 Misdemeanor.  Colorado Revised Statutes 18-7-107 and 18-7-108.

An Act Concerning Invasions of Privacy: Unlawful Dissemination of an Intimate Image. Class A Misdemeanor. Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-189c .

is porn against the law

Unlawful distribution of images depicting states of nudity or specific sexual activities. If disclosed by electronic means, Class 4 felony. If threatens to disclose but does not disclose, Class 1 Misdemeanor. Arizona Revised Statutes, 13-1425

Unlawful distribution of sexual images or recordings, Class A misdemeanor  Arkansas Code 5-26-314  [effective July 22, 2015]

Disorderly Conduct Misdemeanor. California Penal Code 647(j)(4) , Sept 2014 amended version is here  

Posting a Private Image for Harassment (18-7-107) and Posting a Private Image for Pecuniary Gain (18-7-108). Class 1 Misdemeanor.  Colorado Revised Statutes 18-7-107 and 18-7-108.

An Act Concerning Invasions of Privacy: Unlawful Dissemination of an Intimate Image. Class A Misdemeanor. Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-189c .

Unless you happen to have been living on Mars for the last year or so, you probably know that this week ( January 26 to be precise) it will become a criminal offence (in England and Wales) to possess pictures that the government deems to be "extreme porn". You might also be aware of two diametrically opposed views on this legislation.

On the one hand, soothing words from Government and the Ministry of Justice suggest that the offence will catch only a very small number of people who possess the most abhorrent imagery. Cynics - including many lawyers who know a thing or two about obscenity - point out that the law as written is very broad, could catch a lot of quite ordinary stuff, and remind us of how laws, originally "intended" to focus on the most serious offences, end up being used far more widely. A good example is the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 , supposedly aimed at terrorists, and now used by local Councils to pursue individuals guilty of anti-social doggy poo.

Some of the advice in this article is therefore specific to the new extreme porn law: some is more general. It is not legal advice: if you want that, talk to a lawyer. It does set out some of the things you need to know, as well as some things you need to do now in order to make sure your story is not on the front pages of The Register in months to come.

First off, just what is the law? Various guides - including an official release from the Ministry of Justice - make it clear that pictures will fall foul of the new law if four components are present. The pic must be pornographic, or produced for sexual purposes. It must be realistic. It must contain certain specific imagery, including necrophilia, bestiality, activity depicting serious harm to breast, anus or genitals or life-threatening activity. Finally, it must be grossly offensive, as determined either by a jury or magistrate.

All those components must be there. Poster your walls with the most grotesque, the most blood-spattered out-takes from Saw or Hostel and unless someone can prove you actually get off on them, no prosecution could follow. That, of course, highlights one of the first of many question marks hovering over this legislation: is "produced for sexual purposes" defined relative to the motives of the originator of an image, or the motives of the person who downloads it to their hard-drive? Lawyers suspect the latter: so in fact, the out-takes in question might or might not fall foul of the law depending on your personal sexual tastes.

For many years, the Internet was the "final frontier," operating largely unregulated — in part because of the jurisdictional nightmare involved in trying to enforce laws when communications crossed not just state lines but also national boundaries. That was then; this is now. Legislation that affects the use of Internet-connected computers is springing up everywhere at the local, state and federal levels. You might be violating one of them without even knowing.

In this article, we'll take a look at some of the existing laws and some of the pending legislation that can influence how we use our computers and the Internet. Nothing in this article should be construed as legal advice; this is merely an overview of some of the legislation that's out there, how it has been interpreted by the courts (if applicable), and possible implications for computer users.

Most computer users have heard of this law, signed in 1998 by President Clinton, implementing two World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) treaties. The DMCA makes it a criminal offense to circumvent any kind of technological copy protection — even if you don't violate anyone's copyright in doing so. In other words, simply disabling the copy protection is a federal crime.

There are some exemptions, such as circumventing copy protection of programs that are in an obsolete format for the purpose of archiving or preservation. But in most cases, using any sort of anti-DRM program is illegal. This applies to all sorts of copy-protected files, including music, movies, and software. You can read a summary of the DMCA here .

If you're a techie who likes the challenge of trying to "crack" DRM, be aware that doing so — even if you don't make or distribute illegal copies of the copyrighted material — is against the law.

Protesters gathered in London to oppose the decision to ban various sex acts from UK-filmed online porn videos.

Paid-for online porn videos must now adhere to the same rules as content produced for sex shop-type videos.

Protest organiser Charlotte Rose said the "ludicrous" restrictions were a threat to freedom of expression.

The 2014 Audiovisual Media Services Regulation, which the government says will crack down on "harmful content", came into effect earlier this month.

It means acts that would not be classified as an R18 rating, in line with guidelines laid out by the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC), are prohibited.

Unlawful distribution of images depicting states of nudity or specific sexual activities. If disclosed by electronic means, Class 4 felony. If threatens to disclose but does not disclose, Class 1 Misdemeanor. Arizona Revised Statutes, 13-1425

Unlawful distribution of sexual images or recordings, Class A misdemeanor  Arkansas Code 5-26-314  [effective July 22, 2015]

Disorderly Conduct Misdemeanor. California Penal Code 647(j)(4) , Sept 2014 amended version is here  

Posting a Private Image for Harassment (18-7-107) and Posting a Private Image for Pecuniary Gain (18-7-108). Class 1 Misdemeanor.  Colorado Revised Statutes 18-7-107 and 18-7-108.

An Act Concerning Invasions of Privacy: Unlawful Dissemination of an Intimate Image. Class A Misdemeanor. Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-189c .

Unlawful distribution of images depicting states of nudity or specific sexual activities. If disclosed by electronic means, Class 4 felony. If threatens to disclose but does not disclose, Class 1 Misdemeanor. Arizona Revised Statutes, 13-1425

Unlawful distribution of sexual images or recordings, Class A misdemeanor  Arkansas Code 5-26-314  [effective July 22, 2015]

Disorderly Conduct Misdemeanor. California Penal Code 647(j)(4) , Sept 2014 amended version is here  

Posting a Private Image for Harassment (18-7-107) and Posting a Private Image for Pecuniary Gain (18-7-108). Class 1 Misdemeanor.  Colorado Revised Statutes 18-7-107 and 18-7-108.

An Act Concerning Invasions of Privacy: Unlawful Dissemination of an Intimate Image. Class A Misdemeanor. Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-189c .

Unless you happen to have been living on Mars for the last year or so, you probably know that this week ( January 26 to be precise) it will become a criminal offence (in England and Wales) to possess pictures that the government deems to be "extreme porn". You might also be aware of two diametrically opposed views on this legislation.

On the one hand, soothing words from Government and the Ministry of Justice suggest that the offence will catch only a very small number of people who possess the most abhorrent imagery. Cynics - including many lawyers who know a thing or two about obscenity - point out that the law as written is very broad, could catch a lot of quite ordinary stuff, and remind us of how laws, originally "intended" to focus on the most serious offences, end up being used far more widely. A good example is the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 , supposedly aimed at terrorists, and now used by local Councils to pursue individuals guilty of anti-social doggy poo.

Some of the advice in this article is therefore specific to the new extreme porn law: some is more general. It is not legal advice: if you want that, talk to a lawyer. It does set out some of the things you need to know, as well as some things you need to do now in order to make sure your story is not on the front pages of The Register in months to come.

First off, just what is the law? Various guides - including an official release from the Ministry of Justice - make it clear that pictures will fall foul of the new law if four components are present. The pic must be pornographic, or produced for sexual purposes. It must be realistic. It must contain certain specific imagery, including necrophilia, bestiality, activity depicting serious harm to breast, anus or genitals or life-threatening activity. Finally, it must be grossly offensive, as determined either by a jury or magistrate.

All those components must be there. Poster your walls with the most grotesque, the most blood-spattered out-takes from Saw or Hostel and unless someone can prove you actually get off on them, no prosecution could follow. That, of course, highlights one of the first of many question marks hovering over this legislation: is "produced for sexual purposes" defined relative to the motives of the originator of an image, or the motives of the person who downloads it to their hard-drive? Lawyers suspect the latter: so in fact, the out-takes in question might or might not fall foul of the law depending on your personal sexual tastes.