No Age-Related Comics - Page 3

bigboy83 · 01-03-2009

Lorekeep you need to get some legal advice on this issue by keep questionable items under lock and key till a lawyer can make a official ruling on this topic.

gribs · 01-03-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigboy83

Lorekeep you need to get some legal advice on this issue by keep questionable items under lock and key till a lawyer can make a official ruling on this topic.

That's definitely what I would do too. My intuition says that loli-ish materials are pretty risky, but AR stories with no sexual acts are probably safe. If you got an official word on where the line is drawn, then you could with some confidence either approach your current merchant with that info or look for other options, without worrying about your own arse.

I personally hope that you do; I'm pretty sure I won't be buying non-AR process comics myself.

All in all, big

on the situation.

Jamball · 01-03-2009

Just a thought, hopefully people are honest.

But, is it possible to put it up for free and except donations?

I'm not really sure how you'd police that. You'd hope people would be honest.

Just a thought.

I know AP/AR stuff very similar to Lauren and Betsy has been posted in the forum and you haven't mentioned anything about it. So, if they were posted, and donations were accepted (in no way related to the comics), well, that could be a work around.

But, I totally understand if you don't want to put it up. I'd hate to loose this site.

--
Jamball

Fred Londi · 01-04-2009

Hey, all. I’m the one who responded to Lorekeep’s call for legal advice on this subject. After going through this thread, I feel the need to elaborate on a few things.

Before I get into this, let me say that I am not yet a lawyer, but I am in an ABA-accredited law school where I have just recently completed a rigorous course in criminal law. I have access to 2008 edition law books on U.S. Federal and State law with which I can confirm the following statements. I am not yet trained in finding recent case law on the subject, so there is a possibility, albiet slight, that some of this has changed.

gribs’ second quotation in post #14 correctly quotes part, but not all, of the Federal Law regarding child pornography. What’s missing in his quotation is that the child depicted in the AP or AR comic/cartoon/etc. does NOT have to be a real person; it is still child pornography even if the character is imaginary. Call it “big brother” or whatever you wish, but the law spells this out in no uncertain terms:

“(c) Nonrequired element of offense.—It is not a required element of any offense under this section that the minor depicted actually exist.”

It is also a crime to knowingly produce, distribute, receive, or possess with an intent to distribute child pornography. This means that it’s illegal if you know the cartoon/comic/etc. depicts a child engaging in a sexual activity. Since AP and AR images are geared towards a particular fetish, it can likely be argued that AP and AR fetishists are aware of the character’s youth and that the character is engaging in a sexual activity. This is because people with a particular fetish are likely to seek images and the like to satisfy their desire.

The phrase “serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value,” may be viewed as a defense, but in the context of the law, it seems like a trap to snare fetishists. I’m just as much of a Process fan as the rest of you, but I just don’t see a winning argument for an age-reverted adult having sex having “serious artistic value.” I can only say that fetish art has “serious erotic value,” in that the art has value in its ability to arouse us, to make us hard, wet, and ready for a sexual release. Unfortunately, “erotic value” is not the same as “artistic value;” after all, someone can get a boner to his poster of the “Mona Lisa” and not get charged because the work has such “artistic value” independent of any "erotic value" to much of the rest of the world. Since “erotic value” is also not covered in the law, AR or AP work might not be defensible.

One interesting defense to the U.S. Federal Law is that it is NOT illegal if you have less than 3 depictions of a minor participating in any sexual activity. A “depiction,” according to the law, is one single image, or in the case of a computer image, one file. It is unclear from the law if it is a defense to have several pornographic pictures on one massive digital image. I don’t know if that’ll stick as a defense, but that’s the closest thing I could come up with.

Now, the question was raised as to if AP or AR can be legal if it doesn’t have any nudity or sex. The answer is ambiguous, but the wording of the law doesn’t seem to favor AP or AR fetishists, either. The law does require child pornography to include some class of sexually-explicit conduct by the minor depicted, but again, I think this might be a trap. The case can likely be made by a prosecutor that an AP or AR sequence qualifies as “sadistic abuse,” one of the definitions of “sexually-explicit conduct” in the Federal Law. The issue could be raised that such abuse occurred because the AP or AR took place against the character’s will or that the AP’d or AR’d character was left helpless at the hands of another character. It’s a stretch, but that’s the nature of the law and you just can’t count on the court supporting one of us Process fans.

In some cases, state law is even more strict. For example, when California courts determine whether something is child pornography or not, they take into consideration if the artwork is “designed for clearly-defined deviant sexual groups.” If the AP or AR work was created by an AP or AR fan and/or was made for AP or AR fans who are sexually aroused by such works, the California courts might be quick to find a verdict. However, there is the defense that the art has to be “designed” for people to be sexually aroused by them, so an AP or AR work without nudity or sex that still arouses AP or AR fetishists might not be illegal. This is, however, just California’s interpretation.

I hope some of this has cleared up the “murk” about the child pornography laws. As a fellow Process fan, I do not mean to demean or damn anyone’s AP or AR fetish; remember that these are the law’s words, not mine. And also remember that, again, I am only a law student, not yet a card-carrying lawyer, but I am studied in criminal law. You are all certainly entitled to a second, more-informed opinion.

bigboy83 · 01-04-2009

thanks for all that legal advices, Fred Londi

Joe Six-Pack · 01-04-2009

Well, I'm usually a lurker in the TG forum, but this subject does get my interest. I sell books/downloads with art for TG enthusiasts, and I have to deal with this sort of thing myself. One goal of my business has been to keep the legal side of things as simple as possible. When someone suggests to "consult a lawyer," everything gets exponentially more complicated and all enthusiasm you have for doing this goes down the drain.

As for what Lorekeep is going through, very simply, if the vendor doesn't want to sell something for any reason, that's their prerogative. They have the right. Depicting sex involving kids (or adults who are in the body of a kid) and distributing those materials in any way is a ticket to jail. That's just the where the law is right now. There is no "gray area." Context means nothing.

I bought "Life, interrupted" and liked it, but I hated seeing that date rape scene in it. That part may turn people on, but you could easily frame it as "C.P." I also got "Girls Gone Child," and loved it, but the shower scenes were a bit much, and the final panels are legally C.P. and disgusted me. If any legal authority found that file in my possession, I would be charged.

I would encourage Lorkeep to find a way to keep AP/AR fans happy, but just with stories that don't involve sex in any way. Those stories still have value. Stories and comics don't have to have sex to be sexy.

Suning · 01-04-2009

yeah you are right AR is supposed to be "cute" or "funny" never "turn on" or "p."even on AP i think sex is wrong "she still a child on mind" so yeah i dislike when becomes nude on AR with strong sexual points and hate when it becomes rape

Dreamtales · 01-04-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Six-Pack

Well, I'm usually a lurker in the TG forum, but this subject does get my interest. I sell books/downloads with art for TG enthusiasts, and I have to deal with this sort of thing myself. One goal of my business has been to keep the legal side of things as simple as possible. When someone suggests to "consult a lawyer," everything gets exponentially more complicated and all enthusiasm you have for doing this goes down the drain.

As for what Lorekeep is going through, very simply, if the vendor doesn't want to sell something for any reason, that's their prerogative. They have the right. Depicting sex involving kids (or adults who are in the body of a kid) and distributing those materials in any way is a ticket to jail. That's just the where the law is right now. There is no "gray area." Context means nothing.

I bought "Life, interrupted" and liked it, but I hated seeing that date rape scene in it. That part may turn people on, but you could easily frame it as "C.P." I also got "Girls Gone Child," and loved it, but the shower scenes were a bit much, and the final panels are legally C.P. and disgusted me. If any legal authority found that file in my possession, I would be charged.

I would encourage Lorkeep to find a way to keep AP/AR fans happy, but just with stories that don't involve sex in any way. Those stories still have value. Stories and comics don't have to have sex to be sexy.

Obviously I?ve been following this discussion with interest.

Thanks in particular to Joe Six-Pack for your lucid and sobering post. I abhor c. p. and am very shocked and upset that these comics might be characterized as such.

I?ve decided to take the "Girls Gone Child" comics down for good. They are already scrubbed from my website, and deleted from the Process. I?ve also asked the AR Archive to remove them as well. They will no longer be offered for sale.

Please don?t email me and ask for them, or for ?Life Interrupted.?

I will be focusing on size-related comics from now on. If I do revisit AR in the future it will be strictly no sex, no nudity.

Thanks again for the advice.

Cheers, DT

swfind2002 · 01-04-2009

Hmm. This is a rather annoying turn of events. After an all too brief spring of new(and mostly GOOD)AR comic material(never did care for the sex thrown in, though), it looks like the well has dried up for good. It's starting to feel like 1998 all over again...

Joe Six-Pack · 01-05-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dreamtales

I abhor c. p. and am very shocked and upset that these comics might be characterized as such.

DT, I really hate having to be the scary voice of doom. I truly enjoyed these recent comics, except for the "naughty parts." In the case of "Girls," I thought you did a wickedly wonderful job of role reversal between the two, and for that reason, I do not regret having bought it. That was my turn-on. I don't want to stop anyone from doing and making things they enjoy, and then offer them in the spirit of innocent fantasy. Please keep doing what you do, and I hope to see more stuff from you in the near future.

Chiaroscuros · 01-05-2009

You realize, there's no way you'll be able to keep this off the file sharing sites now. People want what they can't have.

Just my 0.02US...

-C

OhZone · 01-05-2009

AR is probably my least fav process, but it makes sense to just keep AR to CUTE. You don't need nudity with AR and you can certainly enjoy the process of change without having actual sex in either case. ararchive is still around because they don't do the actual sex thing, right? Just keep it to cute and NO SEX PLEASE! Ain't that easy? Many of us enjoy process without any nudity or sex at all in ALL catergories. But for AR, just keep it to cute? Makes sense?

Just my half a penny.

Ohwell....

BTW? Another half penny: What is the status of certain jap comics that I stumble across on here and elsewhere? You know what I mean!

01-03-2009	#25
bigboy83 Frequent Poster Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 323	Re: No Age-Related Comics Lorekeep you need to get some legal advice on this issue by keep questionable items under lock and key till a lawyer can make a official ruling on this topic.

01-03-2009	#27
Jamball A Process Lover Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 265	Re: No Age-Related Comics Just a thought, hopefully people are honest. But, is it possible to put it up for free and except donations? I'm not really sure how you'd police that. You'd hope people would be honest. Just a thought. I know AP/AR stuff very similar to Lauren and Betsy has been posted in the forum and you haven't mentioned anything about it. So, if they were posted, and donations were accepted (in no way related to the comics), well, that could be a work around. But, I totally understand if you don't want to put it up. I'd hate to loose this site. -- Jamball

01-04-2009	#28
Fred Londi Raped By Magic Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: inside of you, waiting to strike Posts: 17	What Every AR/AP Fan Should Know Hey, all. I’m the one who responded to Lorekeep’s call for legal advice on this subject. After going through this thread, I feel the need to elaborate on a few things. Before I get into this, let me say that I am not yet a lawyer, but I am in an ABA-accredited law school where I have just recently completed a rigorous course in criminal law. I have access to 2008 edition law books on U.S. Federal and State law with which I can confirm the following statements. I am not yet trained in finding recent case law on the subject, so there is a possibility, albiet slight, that some of this has changed. gribs’ second quotation in post #14 correctly quotes part, but not all, of the Federal Law regarding child pornography. What’s missing in his quotation is that the child depicted in the AP or AR comic/cartoon/etc. does NOT have to be a real person; it is still child pornography even if the character is imaginary. Call it “big brother” or whatever you wish, but the law spells this out in no uncertain terms: “(c) Nonrequired element of offense.—It is not a required element of any offense under this section that the minor depicted actually exist.” It is also a crime to knowingly produce, distribute, receive, or possess with an intent to distribute child pornography. This means that it’s illegal if you know the cartoon/comic/etc. depicts a child engaging in a sexual activity. Since AP and AR images are geared towards a particular fetish, it can likely be argued that AP and AR fetishists are aware of the character’s youth and that the character is engaging in a sexual activity. This is because people with a particular fetish are likely to seek images and the like to satisfy their desire. The phrase “serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value,” may be viewed as a defense, but in the context of the law, it seems like a trap to snare fetishists. I’m just as much of a Process fan as the rest of you, but I just don’t see a winning argument for an age-reverted adult having sex having “serious artistic value.” I can only say that fetish art has “serious erotic value,” in that the art has value in its ability to arouse us, to make us hard, wet, and ready for a sexual release. Unfortunately, “erotic value” is not the same as “artistic value;” after all, someone can get a boner to his poster of the “Mona Lisa” and not get charged because the work has such “artistic value” independent of any "erotic value" to much of the rest of the world. Since “erotic value” is also not covered in the law, AR or AP work might not be defensible. One interesting defense to the U.S. Federal Law is that it is NOT illegal if you have less than 3 depictions of a minor participating in any sexual activity. A “depiction,” according to the law, is one single image, or in the case of a computer image, one file. It is unclear from the law if it is a defense to have several pornographic pictures on one massive digital image. I don’t know if that’ll stick as a defense, but that’s the closest thing I could come up with. Now, the question was raised as to if AP or AR can be legal if it doesn’t have any nudity or sex. The answer is ambiguous, but the wording of the law doesn’t seem to favor AP or AR fetishists, either. The law does require child pornography to include some class of sexually-explicit conduct by the minor depicted, but again, I think this might be a trap. The case can likely be made by a prosecutor that an AP or AR sequence qualifies as “sadistic abuse,” one of the definitions of “sexually-explicit conduct” in the Federal Law. The issue could be raised that such abuse occurred because the AP or AR took place against the character’s will or that the AP’d or AR’d character was left helpless at the hands of another character. It’s a stretch, but that’s the nature of the law and you just can’t count on the court supporting one of us Process fans. In some cases, state law is even more strict. For example, when California courts determine whether something is child pornography or not, they take into consideration if the artwork is “designed for clearly-defined deviant sexual groups.” If the AP or AR work was created by an AP or AR fan and/or was made for AP or AR fans who are sexually aroused by such works, the California courts might be quick to find a verdict. However, there is the defense that the art has to be “designed” for people to be sexually aroused by them, so an AP or AR work without nudity or sex that still arouses AP or AR fetishists might not be illegal. This is, however, just California’s interpretation. I hope some of this has cleared up the “murk” about the child pornography laws. As a fellow Process fan, I do not mean to demean or damn anyone’s AP or AR fetish; remember that these are the law’s words, not mine. And also remember that, again, I am only a law student, not yet a card-carrying lawyer, but I am studied in criminal law. You are all certainly entitled to a second, more-informed opinion. __________________ http://fredlondi.blogspot.com My List of The 10 Sexiest Online TF Sequences! Last edited by Fred Londi; 01-04-2009 at 12:07 AM.

01-04-2009	#29
bigboy83 Frequent Poster Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 323	Re: No Age-Related Comics thanks for all that legal advices, Fred Londi

01-04-2009	#30
Joe Six-Pack Lurkeecher Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 44	Re: No Age-Related Comics Well, I'm usually a lurker in the TG forum, but this subject does get my interest. I sell books/downloads with art for TG enthusiasts, and I have to deal with this sort of thing myself. One goal of my business has been to keep the legal side of things as simple as possible. When someone suggests to "consult a lawyer," everything gets exponentially more complicated and all enthusiasm you have for doing this goes down the drain. As for what Lorekeep is going through, very simply, if the vendor doesn't want to sell something for any reason, that's their prerogative. They have the right. Depicting sex involving kids (or adults who are in the body of a kid) and distributing those materials in any way is a ticket to jail. That's just the where the law is right now. There is no "gray area." Context means nothing. I bought "Life, interrupted" and liked it, but I hated seeing that date rape scene in it. That part may turn people on, but you could easily frame it as "C.P." I also got "Girls Gone Child," and loved it, but the shower scenes were a bit much, and the final panels are legally C.P. and disgusted me. If any legal authority found that file in my possession, I would be charged. I would encourage Lorkeep to find a way to keep AP/AR fans happy, but just with stories that don't involve sex in any way. Those stories still have value. Stories and comics don't have to have sex to be sexy.

01-04-2009	#31
Suning Frequent Poster Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 468	Re: No Age-Related Comics yeah you are right AR is supposed to be "cute" or "funny" never "turn on" or "p."even on AP i think sex is wrong "she still a child on mind" so yeah i dislike when becomes nude on AR with strong sexual points and hate when it becomes rape

01-04-2009	#33
swfind2002 Process Fan Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 59	Re: No Age-Related Comics Hmm. This is a rather annoying turn of events. After an all too brief spring of new(and mostly GOOD)AR comic material(never did care for the sex thrown in, though), it looks like the well has dried up for good. It's starting to feel like 1998 all over again...

01-05-2009	#35
Chiaroscuros Process Fan Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 95	Re: No Age-Related Comics You realize, there's no way you'll be able to keep this off the file sharing sites now. People want what they can't have. Just my 0.02US... -C

01-05-2009	#36
OhZone OhYeah! Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Jersey Shore Posts: 38,933	Re: No Age-Related Comics AR is probably my least fav process, but it makes sense to just keep AR to CUTE. You don't need nudity with AR and you can certainly enjoy the process of change without having actual sex in either case. ararchive is still around because they don't do the actual sex thing, right? Just keep it to cute and NO SEX PLEASE! Ain't that easy? Many of us enjoy process without any nudity or sex at all in ALL catergories. But for AR, just keep it to cute? Makes sense? Just my half a penny. Ohwell.... BTW? Another half penny: What is the status of certain jap comics that I stumble across on here and elsewhere? You know what I mean! __________________ -