Actually, strictly speaking the EA case doesnt really have that much of a bearing on 'fetish' sites of the type we are discussing here, did you actually see the stuff that EA published? It was a little more than your run of the mill BDSM content.. Actually who am i kidding, it was a LOT more than your run of the mill BDSM content.Quote:
Originally Posted by Huskyhunks
The same can be said for the Sweet Erotica case a year or two back, everyone said that if they win / lose it would have a knock-on effect in the industry overall and, to date, i havent seen anything happen because of their win.
These types of 'obscenity' case imho are more about setting the boundaries of 'obscenity' in the porn industry rather than having them as 'ammo' for further prosecutions although, admittedly, im sure that is factored into it also. But, with that said, that sadomasicistic content that both of these producers made, were made purely to push the boundaries in online obscenity and whilst i am one of the first to agree that different people have different tastes in online erotica, you DO have to draw the line *somewhere* id rather not have to see a site full of women having their clits pierced by 10 inche hypodermic needles with blood getting everywhere, the same as i would rather not see sites full of scat content or even something as relatively softcore as those 'fake' *********** sites where the models are sat on horses or cows, or dogs, we know what the site is alluding to and more importantly who it caters to.
Regards,
Lee