I seem to recall that some production of the film "Lolita" cast in Lolita's role an actress who was over 18 but looked younger (perhaps much younger, I haven't seen it so I don't know).
Actually, I know that the actor in the most recent Lolita was 15, and I believe the one in Stanley Kubricks original version was underage too... In both of these movies sex was depicted, and this was perfectly legal, because they weren't actually having sex. (There are alot of movies like this: Brooke Shields was 15 in the Blue Lagoon , a very explicit film) The laws of child porn say that you can't show anybody under 18 doing sexually explicit things for real I assume, thats all.
ha! that's great. It just goes to show that any picture on zeropaid could be faked, another log thrown in the legal fire that must eventually consume the immoral Wall of Shame
>Obviously downloading this is a crime Actually, its not a crime at all. The names of many of these 'trap' files are legally ambiguous, such as 'schoolgirl'. This does not denote child porno in anyway, as it could be a picture of a fully clothed schoolgirl in class, or a naked college girl. What the wall of shame is doing is obviously wrong, and it should be stopped!
Slashdot Mirror
I seem to recall that some production of the film "Lolita" cast in Lolita's role an actress who was over 18 but looked younger (perhaps much younger, I haven't seen it so I don't know).
Actually, I know that the actor in the most recent Lolita was 15, and I believe the one in Stanley Kubricks original version was underage too...
In both of these movies sex was depicted, and this was perfectly legal, because they weren't actually having sex. (There are alot of movies like this: Brooke Shields was 15 in the Blue Lagoon , a very explicit film)
The laws of child porn say that you can't show anybody under 18 doing sexually explicit things for real I assume, thats all.
ha! that's great.
It just goes to show that any picture on zeropaid could be faked, another log thrown in the legal fire that must eventually consume the immoral Wall of Shame
>Obviously downloading this is a crime Actually, its not a crime at all. The names of many of these 'trap' files are legally ambiguous, such as 'schoolgirl'. This does not denote child porno in anyway, as it could be a picture of a fully clothed schoolgirl in class, or a naked college girl. What the wall of shame is doing is obviously wrong, and it should be stopped!