Page 2 of 2

Re: Illegal Porn

Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2012 7:06 pm
by Bayleaf
Muffinorman, I wouldn't put any of Kink.com sites - which are the one's you mention - in Jim's category of lethal porn, or even close. They run a sophisticated operation in, I believe, San Francisco and are always at pains (sic) to interview all their performers before and after to ensure their consent. They also cater for a large amateur community who attend their events which are filmed as "the upper floor" All these people are consenting adults enjoying themselves so I wouldn't worry and enjoy the content.

In fact, there's a level of sexual authenticity in bondage. While most (if not all) performers can easily fake an orgasm while experiencing some light penetration it's much harder to pretend involuntary responses like flushes, sweating and convulsions as prelude to actual climaxes, when tied up.

Re: Illegal Porn

Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2012 7:18 pm
by jimslip
Just a minor point, but the fact that a performer is interviewed beforehand does in no way negate the illegality of possessing a so called "Extreme picture". So a defence of, "She was gagging for it m'lud, she just loves being tied up, beaten, strangled and hung out of a 3rd floor window!" would not go down to well at the Old Bailey! lol

Certainly any woman in an interview bleating how much she loves being abused, would simply incriminate the producer even more. The jury would assume she was just a sad, brow beaten victim, in the clutches of a sadistic brute. Or they'd think at the time of the interview there was someone standing off camera with a cosh!

Best just avoid this kind of material.


Re: Illegal Porn

Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2012 8:13 pm
by andy at handiwork
When some years ago I shot some pretty heavy BDSM, the producer made damn sure that none of the women had sex whilst there was any suggestion of restraint. In fact I had to shoot ropes, cuffs etc being clearly removed prior to any penetration to make it clear there was no duress.

Re: Illegal Porn

Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2012 8:35 pm
by snjanieburton
What you mean distribute without the "correct licenses"?

Re: Illegal Porn

Posted: Tue Sep 18, 2012 9:30 am
by snjanieburton
Jimslip wrote:

"attempt to distribute it without the correct licences"

What are you meaning "without the correct license"?

Re: Illegal Porn

Posted: Tue Sep 18, 2012 9:54 am
by one eyed jack
ie BBFC classification if for sale via digital/ dvd medium and model releases and ids/ std health certs for broadcast and 2257 for websites