Uk people???

[sparks]

Originally Posted by Parisa

It did last Friday...this was a way to identify and arrest u guys. goodbye UK members...have fun in jail.

Think that should be good for a ban matie

Likely not funny to anyone concerned about this crap

Not sure if they could track you through your ISP as it would be an invasion of privacy to track your net traffic and would be rather costly for an ISP to have to do this

It would likely be inforced if your system can be hacked or if your arrested or investigated for something else and they get your computer

for what thats worth

sparks

[pervipete]

Originally Posted by sparks

Think that should be good for a ban matie

Likely not funny to anyone concerned about this crap

Not sure if they could track you through your ISP as it would be an invasion of privacy to track your net traffic and would be rather costly for an ISP to have to do this

It would likely be inforced if your system can be hacked or if your arrested or investigated for something else and they get your computer

for what thats worth

sparks

Well considering that the goverment want ISP to keep all details of emails and internet traffic it probably won't be that hard.

So oh bollocks.

[pervipete]

now now children, play nice, actually, play rough would be more appropriate

[MeltyMan]

Every law has a get out clause (or loophole)

[pervipete]

The trouble is, who wants to be the first person to exploit it.

Knowing both the tabloids, and the way people react. There is a good chance that whoever gets arrested would be hounded, effectively, their life would be more or less over.

If you don't believe me, well here's a true story.

A few years ago there was a big deal about peado's being released in to the community, marches, protest, and attacks on anybody suspected to be a peado all 'encouraged' by the press.

During this a mob burnt down a house, this was the house of a doctor, peadatrician.

Look at the way the press gets their knickers in a twist over anything sexual.

[MeltyMan]

"Extreme pornography" is a term introduced by the UK Government in Part 5, section 63 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, which will make possession of such images a criminal offence from 26 January 2009 and It refers to pornography (defined as an image which "of such a nature that it must reasonably be assumed to have been produced solely or principally for the purpose of sexual arousal") which is "grossly offensive, disgusting or otherwise of an obscene character", and portrays any of the following:

(a) an act which threatens a person’s life,
(b) an act which results, or is likely to result, in serious injury to a person’s anus, breasts or genitals,
(c) an act which involves or appears to involve sexual interference with a human corpse,
(d) a person performing or appearing to perform an act of intercourse or oral sex with an animal (whether dead or alive),

the maximum sentence is 3 years; otherwise the maximum is 2 years. Adults sentenced to at least two years will be placed on the Violent and Sex Offender Register.


But of course there are other laws we should b aware of, such as

It is illegal to die in the Houses of Parliament

It could be regarded an act of treason to place a postage stamp bearing the British king or queen's image upside-down

Eating mince pies on Christmas Day is banned

In the UK, a pregnant woman can legally relieve herself anywhere she wants

The head of any dead whale found on the British coast automatically becomes the property of the King, and the tail of the Queen

It is illegal not to tell the tax man anything you do not want him to know, but legal not to tell him information you do not mind him knowing

It is illegal to enter the Houses of Parliament wearing a suit of armour

In the city of York it is legal to murder a Scotsman within the ancient city walls, but only if he is carrying a bow and arrow.

In Scotland, if someone knocks on your door and requires the use of your toilet, you must let them enter.

In Liverpool, it is illegal for a woman to be topless except as a clerk in a tropical fish store.

[pervipete]

Ah Melty, if I get nicked will you head my defence team

[FuckingRotter]

I suppose part c would be pretty hard to prove unless bits were falling off the corpse.

[justmetoo]

Originally Posted by pervipete

Well considering that the goverment want ISP to keep all details of emails and internet traffic it probably won't be that hard.

So oh bollocks.

It is actually very easy and most ISPs already do this. At least on this side of the pond.

I don't envy you folks over there. Isn't AU thinking about doing something like this as well?

I am SO glad we have the first amendment here.

[GeorgeDaBrute]

well all the brits with tits came move over to my basement ..I think I can make enough cage space... errr guest quarters.

I'm in the uk......how can this be implemented????....this is a fantasy board-a place for people to express desires without being judged..

I'll be fucking fuming if i have to stop posting!

[FuckingRotter]

I don't think we will have to stop posting, the extreme pornography law isn't like the state imposed net nanny being proposed in Australia. The stills in the corner of each page don't come near to anything described in the law, and so long as we stay out of the beasty threads we should be alright.

But be warned, the law doesn't just apply to Internet use, privately taken photos and films of consenting acts where nobody was actually harmed could potentially fall foul of this law if a court decides against it.

No idea where we stand on CG and hand drawn pics though.

[pervipete]

Originally Posted by FuckingRotter

No idea where we stand on CG and hand drawn pics though.

A precedent has been set with them banning cartoon depictions of child sex.

[GOATBOY]

Originally Posted by Parisa2

well there's one sexy UK male in particular that i know of

gee, thanks

[Door'sunlocked_c'monin]

Originally Posted by justmetoo

It is actually very easy and most ISPs already do this. At least on this side of the pond.
I don't envy you folks over there. Isn't AU thinking about doing something like this as well?

I am SO glad we have the first amendment here.

Was thinking the same thing... There's everything from tracking to banning through ISP addys.. That's actually the purpose and basis of a number of companies here in NA. They actually specialize in providing that service.

[Door'sunlocked_c'monin]

Originally Posted by GeorgeDaBrute

well all the brits with tits came move over to my basement ..I think I can make enough cage space... errr guest quarters.

Call me.. I'll drive over..

[Door'sunlocked_c'monin]

Originally Posted by FuckingRotter

I don't think we will have to stop posting, the extreme pornography law isn't like the state imposed net nanny being proposed in Australia. The stills in the corner of each page don't come near to anything described in the law, and so long as we stay out of the beasty threads we should be alright.But be warned, the law doesn't just apply to Internet use, privately taken photos and films of consenting acts where nobody was actually harmed could potentially fall foul of this law if a court decides against it.

No idea where we stand on CG and hand drawn pics though.

That's a crock of crap. While that's not a topic I agree with, that's MY opinion and I have no right to tell someone they don't have the right to enjoy it if they choose to.

I'm confused as to how they can do that...

[FuckingRotter]

Prudish government allowing sensationalist press lobbying to dictate terms and influence new legislation. It's a double edged sword.

[Conrad]

UK member here, although not for much longer by the sounds of this new law

I do have a question though, couldn't we use a proxy server? I mean I don't know what they are or what they do exactly, but I hear of them talked about when people want to be anonimous on teh interwebs.

Can anyone explain it that would work or not, or even what a proxy is, please?

[Brutal Cop]

Originally Posted by FuckingRotter

I don't think we will have to stop posting, the extreme pornography law isn't like the state imposed net nanny being proposed in Australia. The stills in the corner of each page don't come near to anything described in the law, and so long as we stay out of the beasty threads we should be alright.

But be warned, the law doesn't just apply to Internet use, privately taken photos and films of consenting acts where nobody was actually harmed could potentially fall foul of this law if a court decides against it.

No idea where we stand on CG and hand drawn pics though.

Extreme pornography" is a term introduced by the UK Government in Part 5, section 63 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, which will make possession of such images a criminal offence from 26 January 2009 and It refers to pornography (defined as an image which "of such a nature that it must reasonably be assumed to have been produced solely or principally for the purpose of sexual arousal") which is "grossly offensive, disgusting or otherwise of an obscene character", and portrays any of the following:

(a) an act which threatens a person’s life,
(b) an act which results, or is likely to result, in serious injury to a person’s anus, breasts or genitals,
(c) an act which involves or appears to involve sexual interference with a human corpse,
(d) a person performing or appearing to perform an act of intercourse or oral sex with an animal (whether dead or alive),

the maximum sentence is 3 years; otherwise the maximum is 2 years. Adults sentenced to at least two years will be placed on the Violent and Sex Offender Register.


FR, you need to look closely at the wording

(a) an act that appears to threaten a persons life- this would include threats with a knife/bladed article/weapon/choking etc So if you have any movies/clips/photo's etc ( pornography, not mainstream Hollywood) where the victim is been threatened in such a way, you would be committing the offence.

(b) an act that could cause serious harm to a persons anus, vagina or breasts, again these could include BDSM movies where 'victim' is whipped etc.

It is all down to how a court would interpret the image in question. Bare in mind the councils in the UK are using anti terrorism legislation to see what people are putting in their dust bins or where children live as regards school catchment areas, and you will see the very wide scope in which laws can be interpreted.

This means those who down share movies from Rapidshare etc are almost certainly committing the offence, as do those who subscribe to pay per view sites ( easily traced by credit card payments as a lot of kiddie fiddlers have found out to their cost thankfully)


The Police can act on suspicion that an offence has been carried out. That means they can go to your house, arrest you, take all your computers away for examination, search your premises for any other evidence. They don't need a warrant to do this, once a person has been arrested full powers of search of premises and seizure of evidence come into play.

As for me, I will be getting my hard drive wiped ( and I don't just mean press delete), but wiped and will be very careful as to what I look at.

The one saving grace is the police have more than enough on their hands keeping up with kiddy fiddlers and those who groom under age girls ( and rightly so these people should be targeted). To go after those who look at internet porn ( then again credit card traces are easily done) such as that which the act is aimed at, would be a massive job, still who wants to take the chance?