egafd.com

I was looking at old info. However the dramatic drop in the fee charged by the council has only recently been forced on them I think. The argument used successfully by the sex establishments involved was that the fee charged in no way reflected the real cost to the council of issuing the licences. I wonder if the same would stand if an organisation badly affected by the dead hand of atvod attempted to show that the fees charged by the regulator bear no relation to the work actually done in regulating the VOD providers. It seems to me that all atvod do with the money they take in is pay themselves handsomely and spend the rest on finding cleaver, dubious and new ways to stifle and destroy what remains of the porn industry, amongst others.

Not accusing Westminster Council of anything dodgy like but , if it doesnt like its hands soiled with the clammy palm of porn it certainly sounds and feels like extortion with those old fees if you consider not less than 20 years before that the dodgiest of her majestys not so finest plods were taking backhanders for looking the other way with the occasional raid to look good

These days they'll justify rinsing money out of the porn industry by other means. Whats the name of that new company regulating the internet now?

They'll do a good job protecting minors from seeing mexican drug cartel beheadings and free porn via google search

Who needs websites when you can type porn in googles browser and chortle at all the free porn available when you click on images

No age verification for that but I guess google has deep pockets and that certain company doesnt want to be the David to the internets Goliath

Heres an ickle rock for your bolas son. Go on, try your luck