Active Users:420 Time:17/09/2025 01:20:25 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
"sexually explicit material" is different than "obscene" moondog Send a noteboard - 22/02/2011 02:43:49 AM
there is absolutely ZERO evidence of sexually explicit material being created with these kids' images, at least not from the way the story is being reported. yes, he made an "obscene" video, but "sexually explicit" has to actually feature some version of sex and you'd have a very difficult time proving that's what he's done with his video.
"The RIAA has shown a certain disregard for the creative people of the industry in their eagerness to protect the revenues of the record companies." -- Frank Zappa

"That's the trouble with political jokes in this country... they get elected!" -- Dave Lippman
Reply to message
musician jailed over youtube prank -- faces 20+years plus child porn charges moondog - 20/02/2011 07:55:33 AM 1160 Views
Yay for home! MrFarstrider - 20/02/2011 12:20:14 PM 711 Views
Re: Yay for home! everynametaken - 22/02/2011 05:05:49 AM 700 Views
Mmmm, there is more to it . At first I was thinking it was much ado about nothing. Tashmere - 20/02/2011 03:31:51 PM 935 Views
This explains what happened better and lets me feel a little mercy for the guy. Tashmere - 20/02/2011 03:59:41 PM 989 Views
as stated, the children were never exposed to the "adult only" performance moondog - 20/02/2011 04:35:32 PM 711 Views
So I guess the moral of this story is think before you put things on the internet. *NM* Darth_Katie - 20/02/2011 06:10:32 PM 269 Views
He should get the pants sued off him. Ghavrel - 20/02/2011 07:08:56 PM 612 Views
His only mistake was not getting them to sign something, allowing to be posted on youtube A Deathwatch Guard - 21/02/2011 01:51:30 AM 688 Views
kids don't have that right. The parents would have needed to sign. *NM* random thoughts - 21/02/2011 07:24:04 PM 291 Views
The lyrics were hilarious? The sample I read and posted had nothing funny in them...maybe you can Tashmere - 22/02/2011 12:35:05 AM 593 Views
Well ... from this parents perspective dart_board - 21/02/2011 12:33:25 PM 689 Views
Lol and people say human beings aren't civilized *NM* Dark Knight - 21/02/2011 05:32:32 PM 275 Views
Re: Lol and people say human beings aren't civilized dart_board - 22/02/2011 02:19:48 PM 622 Views
Stupid and in bad taste, but certainly not worth jail time *NM* ironclad - 21/02/2011 12:41:28 PM 284 Views
For using the childrens' faces without permission he could be sued for monetary damages. Tom - 21/02/2011 01:50:19 PM 725 Views
Re: For using the childrens' faces without permission he could be sued for monetary damages. moondog - 21/02/2011 03:46:48 PM 704 Views
Tashmere's first reply above has a sample of the lyrics and how they were cut with the video. *NM* Sareitha Sedai - 21/02/2011 03:58:35 PM 260 Views
Agreed, that's really the only thing I can see that he can be sued for here. *NM* Legolas - 25/02/2011 10:36:53 PM 244 Views
"Oh, I didn't actually abuse any of those kids." Sareitha Sedai - 21/02/2011 02:37:00 PM 630 Views
Agreed. But being an asshat is not a crime. *NM* Ghavrel - 21/02/2011 05:02:59 PM 250 Views
No, it's not. Sareitha Sedai - 21/02/2011 05:22:05 PM 711 Views
no but using children to create sexually explicit material is random thoughts - 21/02/2011 07:36:32 PM 719 Views
"sexually explicit material" is different than "obscene" moondog - 22/02/2011 02:43:49 AM 650 Views
That is debatable. Tashmere - 22/02/2011 05:25:46 AM 623 Views
you don't believe both can describe language? random thoughts - 22/02/2011 02:30:16 PM 587 Views
Yes, this was disgusting, but since when does dirty lyrics = porn? Aeryn - 22/02/2011 04:18:05 PM 690 Views
The written word can be considered porn so why not song lyrics? random thoughts - 22/02/2011 05:04:37 PM 633 Views
It can? Aeryn - 23/02/2011 04:34:40 AM 701 Views
Yep Isaac - 23/02/2011 05:04:49 AM 682 Views
Actually, obscenity is one of the most poorly defined concepts in US law. Ghavrel - 26/02/2011 09:57:21 PM 772 Views
Yes, I've posted on the Miller Test Isaac - 26/02/2011 10:54:11 PM 824 Views
Penthouse letters is porn random thoughts - 24/02/2011 12:52:31 AM 621 Views
Am I the only one thinking of The Exorcist here? Legolas - 25/02/2011 10:40:58 PM 761 Views
yes you are the only one thinking that *NM* random thoughts - 25/02/2011 11:33:53 PM 236 Views
You gotta admit it doesn't get much worse than that in terms of exposing children to obscenity. Legolas - 26/02/2011 12:13:46 AM 628 Views
I need say I don't think he should go to prison for twenty years random thoughts - 26/02/2011 07:30:17 PM 664 Views
Yes that is a name Bramhodoulos - 21/02/2011 09:04:19 PM 784 Views
Inappropriate of course but child porn? Give me a break! *NM* everynametaken - 22/02/2011 05:06:20 AM 312 Views
defamation maybe Aeryn - 22/02/2011 04:21:03 PM 576 Views
Not sure if anyone else has asked this... Antigone - 25/02/2011 01:19:08 PM 941 Views
kids are video taped all the time at schools random thoughts - 25/02/2011 02:05:38 PM 580 Views
School staff is one thing, outside sources are another. Avendesora - 25/02/2011 02:56:20 PM 657 Views
most states run background checks and this guy may have had one run on him random thoughts - 25/02/2011 03:19:58 PM 660 Views
he got permission from the teacher and the kids' parents before the original filming session moondog - 25/02/2011 03:20:30 PM 665 Views
they probably didn't think he would it to make a "funny" video random thoughts - 26/02/2011 07:43:59 PM 773 Views
show one example the song was about sex with children and I might agree *NM* moondog - 26/02/2011 09:23:44 PM 284 Views
If you try hard enough you can believe whatever you want random thoughts - 26/02/2011 10:09:45 PM 679 Views
and if you're determined to railroad someone none of the facts matter moondog - 26/02/2011 11:36:42 PM 822 Views
If I put out a video that had you giggling as I sung about cumming on your face you would be fine? random thoughts - 27/02/2011 09:09:25 PM 607 Views
of course not, but the 1st amendment says you have the right moondog - 27/02/2011 11:02:42 PM 573 Views
the courts ruled a long time ago that the 1st amendment does not cover all speech random thoughts - 28/02/2011 10:58:38 PM 796 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes