Court case revolving around ''MANGA''!

[miraclefan]

http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2008-10-10/iowa-collector-charged-for-allegedly-obscene-manga Althou I don't ''read'' any of this stuff, it certainly is a bit concerning they can do this over ''DRAWN'' images! (Sephiroth, this was the case I was talking about in the other thread)

 

[zakkrusz]

Yeah, the case is complete bullshit from a legal standpoint if you ask me, but then again it's sort of his own fault for reading that kind of garbage, so I don't really have much sympathy for his case since he's being charged for what I assume is possession of pedo bait.

 

[hyzmarca]

I read the Court's ruling on the challenges brought up by the defense. What I find missing is a challenge based upon R. A. V. v. City of St. Paul, which would be the best and most substantial challenge to the clauses that the Court upheld.

so I don't really have much sympathy for his case since he's being charged for what I assume is possession of pedo bait.

The article says that it is yaoi, generally a genre aimed at female readers, about romantic relationships between androgynous young men, occasionally graphic sometimes not. Like Slash, it generally is written by women for women, particularly young women and teenage girls. Many are set in high schools or similar environments, with the characters being explicitly or implicitly students under the age of 18.

 

[zakkrusz]

Yeah, I got that it's Yaoi, but unless it involved very minor looking minors or one looks a lot older (IE: pedo-bait) I really don't see why anyone's panties would be in wad over it, hence my assumption. *shrug*

Then again I don't really want to know what goes on in some of those things.

 

[Trent Roman]

These cases bug me. Possession of real material of this sort is a crime because it is, ipso facto, evidence of and complicity in a criminal act, child abuse at the very least. But anything written, drawn or generated via CGI involves no real persons, therefore has no victims, therefore shouldn't be a crime. It's blantant censorship based on moral panic. I'm glad those last laws were struck down as unconstitutional, but the Miller test is little more than an archaic exercise in provincialism.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

 

[hyzmarca]

Yeah, I got that it's Yaoi, but unless it involved very minor looking minors or one looks a lot older (IE: pedo-bait) I really don't see why anyone's panties would be in wad over it, hence my assumption. *shrug*

Then again I don't really want to know what goes on in some of those things.

Never underestimate the stupidity of law enforcement.

 

[Sephiroth]

Obcenity charges...those are still legal?

 

[miraclefan]

Obcenity charges...those are still legal?

I can't belive you have to ask! of course there still legal, at least in some parts of THIS country!

 

[WendellM]

Possession of real material of this sort is a crime because it is, ipso facto, evidence of and complicity in a criminal act, child abuse at the very least. But anything written, drawn or generated via CGI involves no real persons, therefore has no victims, therefore shouldn't be a crime.

Agreed. A photograph involves the violation of a real child and thus is a crime; a drawing doesn't and thus isn't. Unless they want to open the door to paying taxes with drawings of imaginary money rather than actual money, the government might want to reconsider.

In looking around to see if this case had been decided yet, I saw another analogy posted: "So now the US judicial system equates fiction with reality? What will happen to all those films and TV shows which claim that 'No animals were harmed' - Do they need to fear prosecution for *fictional* animal cruelty?" - Gene K.

 

[Trent Roman]

I can't belive you have to ask! of course there still legal, at least in some parts of THIS country!

Perhaps surprisingly given how prudish the country often seems, the U.S. is actually more liberal in this respect than some other western nations. In this country (Canada) the Supreme Court decided that real or drawn made no difference for legal purposes (I got rid of my copy of Moore's Lost Girls when I heard about that). Some guy in Australia got prosecuted (convincted?) over Simpsons porn. Like I said, moral panic.

In looking around to see if this case had been decided yet, I saw another analogy posted: "So now the US judicial system equates fiction with reality? What will happen to all those films and TV shows which claim that 'No animals were harmed' - Do they need to fear prosecution for *fictional* animal cruelty?" - Gene K.

Heh, never mind that: what would happen is the judicial system decided that fictional representations of murder were concomittant with the real thing? Prime-time TV and most of the film industry would collapse overnight!

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

 

[amdmiami]

So looking at hentai is a crime now?

 

[CommodoreKong]

In looking around to see if this case had been decided yet, I saw another analogy posted: "So now the US judicial system equates fiction with reality? What will happen to all those films and TV shows which claim that 'No animals were harmed' - Do they need to fear prosecution for *fictional* animal cruelty?" - Gene K.

Heh, never mind that: what would happen is the judicial system decided that fictional representations of murder were concomittant with the real thing? Prime-time TV and most of the film industry would collapse overnight!

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

Don't forget the videogame industry.

 

[OdoWanKenobi]

So looking at hentai is a crime now?

If that's the case, then half the internet is breaking the law.

 

[zakkrusz]

Nah, because all all those high school girls are "over 18". I mean it says so right in the disclaimers, right, so it must be true right? Even the ones that probabally couldn't even meet the height restriction to ride the tea cups. I mean all respectable colleges make female Japanese students wear sailor suit uniforms with mini-skirts. [/sarcasm]

Not that I have anything against that particular subgenre of adult entertainment, I just have a 70% chance of getting garbage and only a 30% chance of getting something watchable if I'm ever in the mood which isn't very good odds. I can't say a really watch much of it to begin with anyway though.

 

[miraclefan]

I can't belive you have to ask! of course there still legal, at least in some parts of THIS country!

Perhaps surprisingly given how prudish the country often seems, the U.S. is actually more liberal in this respect than some other western nations. In this country (Canada) the Supreme Court decided that real or drawn made no difference for legal purposes (I got rid of my copy of Moore's Lost Girls when I heard about that). Some guy in Australia got prosecuted (convincted?) over Simpsons porn. Like I said, moral panic.

In looking around to see if this case had been decided yet, I saw another analogy posted: "So now the US judicial system equates fiction with reality? What will happen to all those films and TV shows which claim that 'No animals were harmed' - Do they need to fear prosecution for *fictional* animal cruelty?" - Gene K.

Heh, never mind that: what would happen is the judicial system decided that fictional representations of murder were concomittant with the real thing? Prime-time TV and most of the film industry would collapse overnight!
Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

And most if not ''ALL'' actors, producers, & writers would be sent to JAIL!WOW! and I thought the California prison system was over-crowded BEFORE! Question? how did you ''dispose'' of your copy of Moore's ''Lost Girls'' & there really is simpsons porn? Ugh! what? is it just charactors from the show nude or something? DUDE! you have got to have some major issue's if you want to see them naked!

 

[miraclefan]

So looking at hentai is a crime now?

If it's the ''kiddie'' kind YUP! but then again I've seen the way those japanese ''DRAW'' female charactors, some of them look like kids, but they have GIGANTIC BOOBS! ??What the HELL!?

 

[zakkrusz]

Yeah, some of it's really borderline and disturbing. I've seen several that made me physically ill and scarred me for life. On the other hand if they're not that kind they can actually be pretty good, some of them even make a decent attempt at a storyline.

 

[miraclefan]

^WHOH dude! what were you reading!? I myself try to stay away from anything that may make me ill or sick!

 

[hyzmarca]

I can't belive you have to ask! of course there still legal, at least in some parts of THIS country!

Perhaps surprisingly given how prudish the country often seems, the U.S. is actually more liberal in this respect than some other western nations. In this country (Canada) the Supreme Court decided that real or drawn made no difference for legal purposes (I got rid of my copy of Moore's Lost Girls when I heard about that). Some guy in Australia got prosecuted (convincted?) over Simpsons porn. Like I said, moral panic.

In looking around to see if this case had been decided yet, I saw another analogy posted: "So now the US judicial system equates fiction with reality? What will happen to all those films and TV shows which claim that 'No animals were harmed' - Do they need to fear prosecution for *fictional* animal cruelty?" - Gene K.

Heh, never mind that: what would happen is the judicial system decided that fictional representations of murder were concomittant with the real thing? Prime-time TV and most of the film industry would collapse overnight!
Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

And most if not ''ALL'' actors, producers, & writers would be sent to JAIL!WOW! and I thought the California prison system was over-crowded BEFORE! Question? how did you ''dispose'' of your copy of Moore's ''Lost Girls'' & there really is simpsons porn? Ugh! what? is it just charactors from the show nude or something? DUDE! you have got to have some major issue's if you want to see them naked!

Rule 34: There is porn of it. No exceptions.

Simpsons porn tends to be hardcore whole family stuff. Bart/Lisa is most common, but every combination is represented. Santa's Little Helper even gets in on the act. Bart/Homer porn is fairly rare though, because most of it is drawn by heterosexual teenage boys.

Now, there's also Harry Potter porn, but it's drawn by an entirely different audience, heterosexual teenage girls. For this reason, Snape/Harry and Draco/Harry dominate. Often, physical force is involved and one partner really isn't at at all enthusiastic, but does begin to enjoy it at some point. Becuase, you know, Draco really wanted Harry to rape him but just couldn't bring himself to admit it.

 

[miraclefan]

^WHA-HA-HA-HA! MY LORD THAT IS SICK! HA-HA!