Nudist Sites

[IdolKnights]

How are they going to stand against the new regs?

The classic Quotes from ALL Nudist sites

The depiction of adults and children nude in the visual media has enjoyed constitutional protection in the United States since 1958, when the Supreme Court vacated a Court of Appeals finding that Sunshine & Health magazine could be obscene (Sunshine Book Co. v. Summerfield, Postmaster General, 355 U.S. 372). The right to depict adults and children in innocent nude poses has been upheld without a pause for 41 years. In case after case, the Supreme Court and lower courts have always upheld the constitutionality of "nudity without more," specifically referring to the nudist depiction as a fully constitutional form of expression.

Anyone know?

[IdolKnights]

Adding to this ...

Solo sites like Skyler,

If all text, look and feel of the site change to "Hi, I'm Skyler and I'm a nudist... This is my life"

Then would it fall into the Nudist site?

[gaybucks_chip]

No, because the nature of the content on Skyler would fall under 2257.

"Innocent nudity" is arguably still excluded from 2257, but they've made it much harder to argue than it was before... which is why that part of the regs will probably not hold up to the First Amendment under scrutiny.