Online authors beware.
Sep. 28th, 2006 12:11 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kengrChild Torture Sex Stories Earn PA Woman Federal Obscenity Charges
Yes, I'm sure the subject of sure stories is abhorrent to many of you.
But how many of you read or write stories that involve under 18 characters? Or other practices and activities that the general public is apt to find obscene?
Heck, I've *written* stories involving underage sex, as well as kids doing other things that are objectionable to many. I just had it being kid on kid. And I've been accused of being a pedophile by folks who wouldn't even bother to find out anything other than that there were underage characters and sex.
So the main differences between my websites and hers are that mine doesn't charge and isn't well known.
Yeah, there are a lot of *details* that are different. But do you really think that'd make a difference if the feds decided to take *me* to court?
BTW, I think visited the site in question once or twice. And the stuff they are going after the owner for is the most extreme content on the site. I remember it as a spanking story site and one used by age players.
I'll also note that while the article doesn't say anything about it, I'd bet that they'll eventually invoke the RICO laws (as they've done in other recent obscenity cases) to confiscate everything the owner has and all her money besides. Sort of hard to defend yourself with no money or assets.
(ranting follows)
The "local community standards" rule for obscenity is just plain useless when you've got the internet and satellite TV and radio making content available from anywhere in the country or even the world with no possibility of the content owner/producer controlling where it goes.
For that matter, it's *always* been broken in that the only way to find out if a work was "obscene" or not was to be charged and see what the jury would say. But the Supreme Court didn't want to deal with telling the more conservative parts of the country that they couldn't forbid stuff that folks in NYC, LA or San Francisco were ok with. Nor did they want to tell those areas that they couldn't have things that the folks in the Bible Belt objected to.
So they came up with a "compromise" that was flawed from the start and should have been replaced long ago.
And, of course, when you get right down to it, obscenity laws are unconstitutional by their very nature. They violate the First Amendment.
Laws that make consequences of speech punishable are reasonable. Libel, slander, inciting to riot.
Even hate speech laws (which do have their iffy points) are far more in keeping with freedom of speech than any obscenity law is.
And photos, videos and films that required illegal activities to *produce* (kiddie porn, rape films, etc) aren't a matter of freedom of speech but of being the product of major felonies.
But there's no way that written materials or artwork (even CGI) can or should fall under that.
I'm in favor of *labeling* content if an *objective* means of doing so can be arrived at and if it's something that makes it easy for folks to get the "proper" labels without having to *guess* what are the "proper" labels for their stuff. And if hinest mistakes won't get them in legal trouble (which is why the government's proposed labeling laws are not acceptable). I wouldn't mind having my sites set up to allow folks who don't want to see stuff on them to skip that stuff. And to allow sertting filters for their kids.
But I've looked at the voluntary labeling sites and I'm just not capable of deciding how to label my stuff. It's all *way* too subjective.
But for now, I'm leaving my stuff up.
Yes, I'm sure the subject of sure stories is abhorrent to many of you.
But how many of you read or write stories that involve under 18 characters? Or other practices and activities that the general public is apt to find obscene?
Heck, I've *written* stories involving underage sex, as well as kids doing other things that are objectionable to many. I just had it being kid on kid. And I've been accused of being a pedophile by folks who wouldn't even bother to find out anything other than that there were underage characters and sex.
So the main differences between my websites and hers are that mine doesn't charge and isn't well known.
Yeah, there are a lot of *details* that are different. But do you really think that'd make a difference if the feds decided to take *me* to court?
BTW, I think visited the site in question once or twice. And the stuff they are going after the owner for is the most extreme content on the site. I remember it as a spanking story site and one used by age players.
I'll also note that while the article doesn't say anything about it, I'd bet that they'll eventually invoke the RICO laws (as they've done in other recent obscenity cases) to confiscate everything the owner has and all her money besides. Sort of hard to defend yourself with no money or assets.
(ranting follows)
The "local community standards" rule for obscenity is just plain useless when you've got the internet and satellite TV and radio making content available from anywhere in the country or even the world with no possibility of the content owner/producer controlling where it goes.
For that matter, it's *always* been broken in that the only way to find out if a work was "obscene" or not was to be charged and see what the jury would say. But the Supreme Court didn't want to deal with telling the more conservative parts of the country that they couldn't forbid stuff that folks in NYC, LA or San Francisco were ok with. Nor did they want to tell those areas that they couldn't have things that the folks in the Bible Belt objected to.
So they came up with a "compromise" that was flawed from the start and should have been replaced long ago.
And, of course, when you get right down to it, obscenity laws are unconstitutional by their very nature. They violate the First Amendment.
Laws that make consequences of speech punishable are reasonable. Libel, slander, inciting to riot.
Even hate speech laws (which do have their iffy points) are far more in keeping with freedom of speech than any obscenity law is.
And photos, videos and films that required illegal activities to *produce* (kiddie porn, rape films, etc) aren't a matter of freedom of speech but of being the product of major felonies.
But there's no way that written materials or artwork (even CGI) can or should fall under that.
I'm in favor of *labeling* content if an *objective* means of doing so can be arrived at and if it's something that makes it easy for folks to get the "proper" labels without having to *guess* what are the "proper" labels for their stuff. And if hinest mistakes won't get them in legal trouble (which is why the government's proposed labeling laws are not acceptable). I wouldn't mind having my sites set up to allow folks who don't want to see stuff on them to skip that stuff. And to allow sertting filters for their kids.
But I've looked at the voluntary labeling sites and I'm just not capable of deciding how to label my stuff. It's all *way* too subjective.
But for now, I'm leaving my stuff up.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-09-28 09:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-09-28 10:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-09-28 11:44 pm (UTC)You might check to see if the site is blocked by your ISP or some filter