Chatgirl TVX - Chat & Discussion

It looks like the show has launched as scheduled but with one or two technical gremlins.

I just hope they know what they are doing, and it doesn't end in tears, they have to be registered with ATVOD, and any hardcore content has to be behind a pay wall, so i hope they know the rules and don't get in trouble like Playboy did, (Playboy later appealed and moved services abroad to escape ATVOD/Ofcom regulation) .

(16-01-2013 21:38 )dave34 Wrote:  Playboy TV fined £100,000 over porn websites
by Ofcom after two of its porn websites offered explicit material without restricting under-18s from viewing it.

Read more: http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/media/news/a...layboy-tv-

(28-09-2013 00:36 )eccles Wrote:  Playboy was fined by ATVOD, the regulator that is semi independent of Ofcom and in charge of regulating streaming TV over the internet.

Their rules, as dictated by Ofcom (or an amazing coincidence) say children must be protected against streaming porn filth by a paywall, and that must use credit cards (age verified), not debit cards or other payment methods. Also providers of streaming TV must register with them.

It is perfectly legal to show hardcore porn, even stuff above R18 on UK websites, provided it is not child porn or extreme porn (corpses, torture, etc).

That means that penetration, ejaculation, anal, oral, fisting, pissing are all legal on UK websites. Provided there is a paywall.

(Not sure about scat, and dont really want to know. If Cameron gets his way anything above R18 will be banned, but thats not the law yet).

Not registering with ATVOD is an offence that can lead to a fine
So is not having porn behind a paywall.
Having explicit samples outside the paywall is an offence.

One blowjob or glimpse of snatch is all it takes.

Playboy one case over content and was fined £100,000, so they promptly said they were going to take their operation outside the UK. In a second case ATVOD looked at their setup and said too much of it was still UK based to escape the rules. Playboy lost the first case but won the second one (about future regulation) on appeal.

Now ATVOD are claiming they were not provided with all the facts:
"In this case, it is unfortunate that ATVOD was not provided with all relevant information at the appropriate time - doing so ensures that unnecessary regulatory costs are avoided."
and
ATVOD noted: "The success of their appeal means that they can continue providing hardcore internet porn to UK consumers beyond the reach of British regulation."

Ah -
"The fines levied by ATVOD in January 2013 still stand, as the UK company was the provider of the services at the time of the breach."

(01-11-2013 12:40 )mr mystery Wrote:  Yes there are regulations, UK based and owned web shows uploaded from the UK come under ATVOD regulation and rules

I think you're completely wrong there mr mystery. The VOD part of ATVOD stands for video on demand. Live streams are not video on demand and are not subject to ATVOD regulation.

(01-11-2013 14:37 )elgar1uk Wrote:  It looks like the show has launched as scheduled but with one or two technical gremlins.

I notice there's no sound on the stream. Is that what you're referring to? Although Kimmy Haze is in good form nevertheless.

(01-11-2013 14:57 )mr mystery Wrote:  they have to be registered with ATVOD, and any hardcore content has to be behind a pay wall, so i hope they know the rules and don't get in trouble like Playboy did,

The Playboy case had nothing to do with live streams so it's not relevant here. ATVOD don't deal with broadcasting, only with video on demand.

Wonder if SS are more worried by the new rival that they're letting on? They've just tweeted this!!

(01-11-2013 15:19 )admiral decker Wrote:  

(01-11-2013 12:40 )mr mystery Wrote:  Yes there are regulations, UK based and owned web shows uploaded from the UK come under ATVOD regulation and rules

I think you're completely wrong there mr mystery. The VOD part of ATVOD stands for video on demand. Live streams are not video on demand and are not subject to ATVOD regulation.

Yes i've seen you have posted the same in the past when other people have said the same as me concerning live UK based video internet website services being regulated in some way or other by UK/ATVOD rules and you have to be age verified to view them, but i have never been able to find anywhere that mentions there is a difference in regulation in the UK concerning Adult content Live video streaming and rerecorded video streaming, or that any UK rules that apply to recorded video streaming don't apply to live video streaming of non age verified adult material, Shebang have stated that their live shows are governed by UK regulations, they didn't specifically mention they were regulated by ATVOD though.
From what i can make out if video streaming is deemed "television like" in nature then it is regulated by ATVOD weather that be live video streaming or recorded video streaming, just like live and recorded tv broadcasts are regulated by Ofcom .

(01-11-2013 15:31 )admiral decker Wrote:  

(01-11-2013 14:57 )mr mystery Wrote:  they have to be registered with ATVOD, and any hardcore content has to be behind a pay wall, so i hope they know the rules and don't get in trouble like Playboy did,

The Playboy case had nothing to do with live streams so it's not relevant here. ATVOD don't deal with broadcasting, only with video on demand.

The Playboy case concerned them streaming adult content material that could be viewed without any age verification needed in order to view it.
Like i have said i haven't seen anywhere that the rules are different for live video streaming and recorded video streaming concerning age verification issues, and i haven't seen anywhere that ATVOD have said they don't deal with live video streaming issues if any occur .
From what i can gather whether a website's broadcast streaming is live or not doesn't determine if it comes under UK or ATVOD regulation concerning age verification rules, other factors determine if a UK based website is under UK/ATVOD's jurisdiction and age verification UK website rules .

(01-11-2013 15:25 )woolleysheep Wrote:  I notice there's no sound on the stream. Is that what you're referring to? Although Kimmy Haze is in good form nevertheless.

There were a couple of other gremins at the start, but I agree that the lack of sound is the only ongoing issue.

(01-11-2013 18:15 )mr mystery Wrote:  live and recorded tv broadcasts are regulated by Ofcom .

Recorded TV broadcasts are not regulated by Ofcom. Recorded TV broadcasts are considered TV on demand and are regulated by ATVOD.

(31-10-2013 18:57 )Shan_afc_90 Wrote:  just another webshow who sexstation will wipe the floor with quite easily

I do think we should give it a chance before being too harsh on it. It's quite a decent line up - Kimmy and Jaye were two of my favourites from Sexstation and if it's the same Jessica Jensen who lit up the previous Chatgirl Hardcore attempt back in May then we're in for a treat. Hopefully they'll settle down quite nicely. It's a good sign that they seem to have got their advertising act together and are featured prominently on this site, with their own section and links to the webstream, something that was lacking with the previous attempt in the summer. I only discovered that one by accident and the threads on this site were buried in the "Other web shows" section.

As I mentioned before, Chatgirl is sadly lacking a proper nightshow. As many of the current daytime line up are nightshow veterans this could be an opportunity for them to get their tops off and be raunchier than they would be allowed to be on a normal daytime show, this would give Chatgirl something unique. Perhaps this could be something for the extended Wednesday hours, the first session could be the topless dayshow serving as a teaser for the hard show later.

I hope the venture succeeds and that they manage to supplement the line up with some of the girls I mentioned in my previous post.