Melonfarmers' coverage of the story today and in the earlier stages.
[Link]
Interview, The (All Her Luv) - review by Danielmayu33216| Author | Post |
|---|---|
| Flinty Member uk 164 Posts 5/00 |  Posted - May 23 2005 : 12:22PMWhat the hell is going on in the UK? Backtracking? ------------ BBC news release 23rd May, 2005. Adult-only porn videos and DVDs cannot be sold in the UK by mail order, the web or phone, the High Court has ruled. They said the aim of the law was to stop the material falling into the hands of children. It was argued at a recent hearing that the law harmed UK mail order firms and benefited overseas sex companies. Forbidden material Lord Justice Kay said: "We have no doubt that one of the main reasons for the restriction is to ensure that the customer comes face-to-face with the supplier so that there is an opportunity for the supplier to assess the age of the customer. "It is a disincentive to a visibly under-age customer to seek out the forbidden material." He said that it was no answer to say that the restrictions were unjustified because they could be circumvented. "Whilst they do no make it impossible for a determined minor to come into possession of an R18 video, they make it more difficult," he added. It is a disincentive to a visibly under-age customer to seek out the forbidden material Lord Justice Kay The judges were dismissing two appeals by licensed sex businesses fined thousands of pounds after prosecutions by Liverpool City Council's trading standards department. Interfact Ltd, which has a sex shop in Bexley, and Pabo Ltd, based in Birmingham, were found guilty at Liverpool Magistrates' Court in April 2004 of offering R18 classified videos in their website catalogues. At the recent hearing which led to the judges' ruling, David Pannick QC, for Interfact, said it made "no sense" to allow sales to adults who were physically present, but prohibit mail order. No human rights breach "Indeed, the only purpose which such an interpretation of the law would serve would be to damage the local economy in favour of the economy in France or the Netherlands," he had told the hearing. Mr Pannick had claimed prohibiting mail order would breach Article 10 - the right to freedom of expression - of the European Convention on Human Rights. But the judges rules there was no Article 10 breach. Interfact was fined £3,000 for one offence of supplying and £2,000 for one offence of offering to supply. It was ordered to pay £25,617 prosecution costs. Pabo Ltd was fined £2,500 in relation to one offence. It was ordered to pay £22,314 prosecution costs. Edited by - flinty on May 23 2005 [Link] |
| Gabriel Nine Senior Member Firecracker 1273 Posts 8/01 | Posted - May 23 2005 : 1:09PM Melonfarmers' coverage of the story today and in the earlier stages. [Link] |
| Flinty Member uk 164 Posts 5/00 | Posted - May 23 2005 : 3:04PM Anyone else in the UK confused as to where the law stands?? [Link] |
| sir wankalot Member UK 904 Posts 5/03 | Posted - May 23 2005 : 3:27PM Basically, if you want to sell R18 films you have to open a licensed sex shop or move abroad to sell these by mail order. If you want to sell hardcore magazines featuring gaping arseholes, spunk covered faces and women swallowing cock you can....regardless of whether children 'may' buy them by mail order. You can even advertise by leafleting door to door (no photos or obscene language). [Link] |
| Gabriel Nine Senior Member Firecracker 1273 Posts 8/01 | Posted - May 23 2005 : 3:35PM It is indeed very stupid that it is perfectly legal to import material equivalent to R18 into the UK, while sales within the UK remain illegal. The VRA was at the time a knee-jerk piece of legislation as a reaction to home video, video nasties etc; this and the Obscene Publications Act are both long, long overdue reform to reflect contemporary values, technology and so on. However, the problem is no mainstream politician is going to touch this with a barge pole, for obvious reasons. I find it quite ironic that the last significant political intervention in this arena was when Jack Straw pressured the BBFC to disallow the classification of fully hardcore titles and he inadvertently kick-started a chain reaction that ended up with precisely the opposite result that he desired. [Link] |
Jacco  All-Star Member "liable to deprave and corrupt" 2673 Posts 5/04 | Posted - May 23 2005 : 4:45PM But looking at the bright side, my job is secure for some time again , allthough we'd rather have it differently, even if that means more competition. It's just a really sad state of affairs...
[Link] |
| Tinaka Member 953 Posts 8/03 | Posted - May 23 2005 : 8:14PM Basically the law was clear, enforced and i don't know how anyone could argue that "no mail-order" meant any thing but "no mail-order". Though the European courts might overturn it- maybe. Anyway it really doesn't affect me so i don't care. Stupid law though, but hey the situation could be alot worse (Plus there are no age restrictions on porn mags- officially) Edited by - Tinaka on 5/23/2005 8:20:13 PM [Link] |
| Flinty Member uk 164 Posts 5/00 | Posted - May 24 2005 : 11:59AM [Link] |
| Uroguy Member 45 Posts 12/03 | Posted - May 24 2005 : 2:33PM Shame. UroG [Link] |
| Use the code below to link to this topic or a specific post. |
| URL of this thread |
| Link to this post with HTML |
| Link to this post with Forum Code |