QUOTE
NO ONE should be able to tell a hentai site what FICTIONAL images can be posted.
I keep on seeing variations of the above MISTAKEN interpretation. That type of thinking resembles "My employer unfairly told me I must starve to death since he unfairly fired me for never coming in to work." It is an entitlement mentality that says advertisers must give you money even if you do not satisfy their requirements.
The original statement was along the lines of advertisers saying if the site has (beastiality/shota/loli) then we cannot have our ads on your site (and thus pay you). That is NOT telling us what we can have. Anyone has the right to not give you money if you do not satisfy their requirements.
Now, if you wish to continue with your complaint, you should reword it as "NO ONE should be able to pass a law restricting what FICTIONAL images can be posted since that makes imaginary objects into thought crimes." Well, there is such a law called the Protect Act as passed by the Republicans when they had control (passed before that senator of theirs flipflopped and became independent). All you people who voted for it got what you voted for in the campaign promises by the Republicans. Of course, the final EFFECT of what was done was different from what you wanted, eh? Read more about the Protect Act.
[
en.wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_Act_of_2003You will see that the key things that concern us are that IMAGINARY DEPICTIONS do not fall below the legal consent ages in our community (typically 16 to 18) AND that the items do not satisfy the Miller test. The Miller Test is basically "imaginary things that are sexy are okay and imaginary things that make you lustful are not okay".
Here is where I go out on a limb, but I postulate that the people who hate the extreme things in anime have managed to think about ways to decrease its availability. One way is to prosecute, but that is annoying to communities since they already don't have enough police to prosecute real crimes upon living and not imaginary people. The other is to choke off the funds that make the activity possible -- cut funding for the archives and board sites. This is wholly in line with what Karl Rove (do you remember him?) said in the first term. He talked about cutting the ways that the lawbreakers use to fund themselves and then these crimes will have a significant decrease. If the FBI or someone sends and advisory to the porn industry about not being associated with lawbreakers or "we will seize your computers, freeze your assets, and take our time checking them out", then that makes advertisers nervous about anime beastiality, lolicon, and shota. After all, those three are prohibited by the un-challenged un-firetested Protect Act.
Now, back on more familiar ground, you and I both know that big corporations, rich people, and law enforcement often bring prosecution up knowing that there is a good chance they will fail if it is challenged and appealed all the way in a fight to the end. But they know that most people do not have the money or guts to do that. Thus, they get convicted even though they would win a case if they could pay for it. Many RIAA and MPAA cases get dismissed or the fines reduced to tiny amounts. But for those who cannot pay the 125,000 dollars that one defendant did (the final total was more), then they have to declare guilt. Remember, you get the piece of paper to sign where you affirm you are guilty or you are innocent. If you choose innocent, then you have to pay and pay and pay. That is a big problem with the American legal system.
Meanwhile the Protect Act is unchallenged. It would take a ton of money to challenge it, but since it is a law that highly resembles the "1984" book's version of "goodthink" and "goodspeak", it would probably fall. But how many millions of dollars would it take? The people who made that must have had some CYNICAL GLEE about the obstacle of challenging the Protect Act. Importantly, the Justice Department (during the Bush administration) made the statement IN PRINT that they fully intended to make stronger versions of the Protect Act. However, all those Bush tax cuts for rich did not improve the economy and so Obama is elected. After the Obama patches things up, the voters will feel that "we hate balanced budgets (taxes)" and elect a republican again. Then the next version of Protect Act can follow unless it was struck down. Let's hope Protect gets struck down before the general public accepts it as the NORM. If so, that would make it very hard to remove.
=====
RANT: (the "watch my karma go down" section)
People are just too placid about their rights. And if you rise up to challenge, you get labeled a liberal (negative connotation). That's where the politicization begins and why it is almost impossible to discuss consumer/people's rights without politics getting into it.
If people would only remember history. But I guess that is too much to ask. Heck, no one remembers the fake electriicity crisis during the first year of Bush, nor the fake food crisis (also during Bush). That allowed the companies to drive up the base prices much higher than before. They knew full well with a republican in office that they would not be prosecuted and investigations would fall short. Do people even remember that the federal government under Bush FORBID some beef companies from testing 100% of their cattle for mad cow disease? A number of foreign countries do test, and the USA has one of the lowest testing rates. It was to prevent a panic caused by statistics, since if 100% were tested, you could then develop statistics for how many mad cows were actually entering the market. Oh well, let's have a "business friendly" legal system as mentioned in the Bush first term campaign. But something to remember is that systems that are "business friendly" are opposed to being "consumer friendly".
There's just too much intolerance going around. Tolerating imaginary things is bad. We must get rid of crime. Liberalism is a disease that can be cured!!! I guess only in the USA is "tolerance" and "liberalism" a bad thing? Well, I guess we get the laws we deserve? It's just that I don't feel that I deserve this Protect law that so many others feel I should have. Just wait until ACTA gets ratified and it will be the "Protect" for the fansubbers and scanlators.
[
www.aolnews.com]
http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/texa...andard/19397481[
www.nytimes.com]
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/education/13texas.htmlACTA NUTSHELL: ACTA switches scanlation/fansubbing from being mostly a civil matter into that of a significant criminal matter. Thus, the [
en.wikipedia.org]
Chilling Effect will occur on those activities. Indirectly, isn't that yet another way of telling us what scanlations/fansubs can be posted? Almost none, although the group scanlating [
oddsquadscans.blogspot.com]
Half Prince got permission from the author to scanlate it. I guess it's not the norm for scanlation/fansub groups to get permission.
So it has come to this, Achtung!
Apr 5 2010, 04:39
