Internet Porn Site Regulation

Whats PH ? some good comments but the law has been passed so be interesting to see if any one would be willing to take on the government in court. Mindgeek one oft he largest site owner already indicated they would be complying.

(01-01-2018 03:29 )russmeyer Wrote:  Whats PH ?

PH is part of Mindgeek.

yeah thats them... they have become the worlds largest distributer of porn. most of which is stolen content. so why would i trust them with my bank details... especially as there an american company which isnt bound by british law to protect our data. they can if they wish sell it on and the uk gov could do nothing other than complain.

if no 1 signs up to the tracker which is what it is.
then bombard may as well as your local mp's with "who are you to tell other grown adults what they can and cannot view" (not just porn its all adult content) we might have a chance to get this bill over turned.

its censorship by the back door and shes hoping that people will just not sign up then say nothing because the word porn is in there 2.
like i say this bill doesnt just affect porn. it affects your google search, youtube, vimeo, twitter and any other content the government deems adult in nature.
its not about protecting the kids, it is all part of mays plan to be able to track every 1s searches and tie it back to your bank details thus identifying you legally.
because there are already adult blocks in place at the isp's which you either have to provide details of your age or sign in to your billing account and remove the blocks.
so there are already blocks in place so there is no good reason why we should all have to stand in line with our photo id other than the government wanting to build a database.

there are already a few court cases pending that are going to challenge the bill. as the last time the cons tried to censor porn they lost on the first court visit.
basically the judge ruled that if its legal so theres no reason for government intervention as they were limiting a legal businesses ability to make a profit.

There will be an influx of fake age verification pages that will steal data aswell, I think this will cause a big problem once its implemented.

You can already see fake av popups on tube sites.

Also I wonder if twitter and reddit will have to comply by putting NSFW content behind AV, there does not seem to be anything in the bill that exempts these

(01-01-2018 10:33 )301 Wrote:  There will be an influx of fake age verification pages that will steal data aswell, I think this will cause a big problem once its implemented.

You can already see fake av popups on tube sites.

Also I wonder if twitter and reddit will have to comply by putting NSFW content behind AV, there does not seem to be anything in the bill that exempts these

yep twitter and reddit will both be affected. this affects the whole web mate not just porn.
the gov has just put PORN on the front because its the most emotive and easiest to justify under there guise of protecting the children. when in reality its all about censoring adults.

(01-01-2018 10:38 )HEX!T Wrote:  

(01-01-2018 10:33 )301 Wrote:  There will be an influx of fake age verification pages that will steal data aswell, I think this will cause a big problem once its implemented.

You can already see fake av popups on tube sites.

Also I wonder if twitter and reddit will have to comply by putting NSFW content behind AV, there does not seem to be anything in the bill that exempts these

yep twitter and reddit will both be affected. this affects the whole web mate not just porn.
the gov has just put PORN on the front because its the most emotive and easiest to justify under there guise of protecting the children. when in reality its all about censoring adults.

From this article http://www.wired.co.uk/article/pornhubs-...onomy-bill

It appears that sites like twitter will only be 'asked'

Quote:“We would ask Twitter to close down an account that had hardcore pornography. But we don't have the power to compel it and we don't know how Twitter would respond.”

(01-01-2018 10:44 )301 Wrote:  

(01-01-2018 10:38 )HEX!T Wrote:  

(01-01-2018 10:33 )301 Wrote:  There will be an influx of fake age verification pages that will steal data aswell, I think this will cause a big problem once its implemented.

You can already see fake av popups on tube sites.

Also I wonder if twitter and reddit will have to comply by putting NSFW content behind AV, there does not seem to be anything in the bill that exempts these

yep twitter and reddit will both be affected. this affects the whole web mate not just porn.
the gov has just put PORN on the front because its the most emotive and easiest to justify under there guise of protecting the children. when in reality its all about censoring adults.

From this article http://www.wired.co.uk/article/pornhubs-...onomy-bill

It appears that sites like twitter will only be 'asked'

Quote:“We would ask Twitter to close down an account that had hardcore pornography. But we don't have the power to compel it and we don't know how Twitter would respond.”

if twitter refuse then they have to be blocked. its not a case of asking. they are told.
basically the person that said that they will just ask is trying to play down the effect it will have on the rest of the web, in the hope people concentrate on the porn aspect.
its about blocking all adult content mate not just porn, and if the gov can say its ok twitter doesnt need to comply, then theres no reason why any other site should either...
as twitter is second only to actual porn sites for the amount of porn on there.

(31-12-2017 20:27 )HEX!T Wrote:  the identity/credit card checks need not happen. if no 1 signs up, the channels will have no option but to take the government to court for limiting a legal businesses ability to make a profit if they get blocked.
...

It's not likely to work like that. It's going to be just one or two gateways for all adult content. So once you're signed up to AgeID or whatever, it'll check you straight through on each affiliated site. So you'd have to get guys to not sign on for any porn (probably including access to this site). Good luck with that! Mindgeek speculate that 20million plus people will sign up in the first month this hits. (It would make sense for the channels to go with the major gateway provider for obvious reasons.)

Anyway, I can't see the channels fighting this - it'll be the same as it was with Ofcom. That was even more of a direct hit on their business model and they never went near a court for that. They had the opportunity to make the arguments about hitting their business then too.

The operators are too small with just have too much to lose (and the industry in total is smaller than it was at the time of the Ofcom thing) forthis kind of fight. The BBFC will be able to fine for non-compliance, as well as seek credit card and ISP blocks. I wouldn't think Ofcom would look too kindly on a licencee not complying with the law either. I imagine that would make them not 'fit and proper' to hold one.

If there was going to be a fight back there we would have heard rumblings by now surely. The bill is law - it has been for months and this thing has been planned and public for months before that (the relevant consultation documents went out in Feb 2016).

The channels are obviously busy planning for the change. We can already see some alterations to their programming and innovations they are trying in preparation for it. They seem to have accepted it once again...

Then, if your talking about the review that led to the creation of the R18 category as the last victory for porn in the UK, well that was the BBFC trying to uphold an outdated system; this is them applying a 'working' system to the net. Also the cultural environment is quite different now to what it was in 2000.

I can't believe Twitter will be sanctioned for non-compliance either. It will be allowed to make noises about greater scrutiny, and stricter terms and conditions, and teams taking down 'extreme' content, and it will go on largely as before.

if government ask twitter to comply and they refuse then no 1 should be forced to comply. but with the channels it wont be a case of none compliance.
they just have to turn up at court with proof that government over regulation is impeding there ability to run there legal business on a level playing field.
if they dont then they can pretty much say goodbye to there internet business over night. as the signup to there site will drop through the floor as will the profits it brings.

like i said there are already age blocks in place that can only be lifted by the bill payer/account owner. so there is no real need for these new regulations.
if a child is found to have the blocks removed on there device then its the parents who should be held responsible and fined.
as you shouldnt have your liberties curtailed because some 1 else cant be bothered to look after there kids properly and thats basically what this bill is suggesting.
the nanny state saying we are all gonna be held responsible for what every kid does even if that kid is 300 miles away. ERM NO!.

also you like my vlc thread and the rtmpdump thread?
if the channels are able to identify me, what makes you think im gonna take the risk of keeping the list going. sorry but no. im not willing to take the risk of jail for hacking. which is basically how i get the info.
hacking has a big black NO! over it so carries disproportionate senescences.
also there will be a surge in the use of vpn's an tor so instead of forcing compliance they will be forcing people to break the law if they want to keep there privacy.

there are so many issues with this shit thats its just not gonna be worth the effort. for me at least.

Oh you'll get no argument from me on the ridiculousness of this legislation. If you care to look back you'll see I've posted more than most in those very terms.

But I just can't see the fight back you are claiming coming from this lot. Maybe they are waiting to see what actually happens; there is still much to be seen on how effective any of this is policed and if it's applied even-handedly or targeted at the bigboys only. The Sky list the regulator is supposedly using lists 4 million sites doesn't it. How long will chasing the non-compliers take? You can see some prioritising is going to have to be done.

Can't see why it would have to affect anyone as tech savvy as you dude, all that much. This is an issue of prinicple not of practicalities.