egafd.com

Hi

I am after a little legal advice!

I'm planning to setup a website, featuring 16 y/o's girls and above topless...I was hoping someone could enlighten me on any legal implications of doing this?

The site is likely to be hosted on a server in the US.

My understanding is, that a 16 topless over here, isnt really anything to get the boys from the Obscene publications on my back, as they have been famous 16 y/o page 3 girls...

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks.

A model release form is a legal document that must be signed by an adult, i.e. 18yrs or over.
In any case, you are playing with fire.

I read somewhere over the last week that new laws will be introduced in the next parliament to make the use of under 18's illegal in pornography.

(Lots of court cases on what is and isn't "pornography" methinks)

Don't even bother putting it on a US hosted server, it will be taken down pretty damn quick and should you ever set foot on US soil there will be a nice cosy cell waiting. The US definition of CP is girls under 18, not 16!

As Marcus posted, you are playing with fire!! I would recommend you steer clear before accusations fly, albeit probably unwarranted. But remember, mud does stick!!

The thing is, IMO its crazy for parliament to raise the age girls are allowed to pose topless to 18.
That would mean its not ok to look at a topless pic of a 16/17 year old, but its perfectly legal to have sex with a 16/17 year old girl. Theres something mixed up there!
They ought to do something about the fact that a lot of girls are losing their virginity at 14 and 15 (too young IMO) and stop worrying about topless pictures of 16 and 17 year olds.

But is topless "porn"?

You can see the lawyers lining up............

You make a good point. Id say topless (Page 3 style) is NOT porn.

I'm not sure if you'd get too many under 18 year olds to model either, even if they want to do it. As Marcus points out, under 18 models still needs a parent / guardian to give their permission for nude work and the fact that so few such models are under 18 indicates that most parents aren't happy to sign!

Samatha Fox surely owed her amazing fame in the 80s to her being one of the first 16 year old page 3 girls (possibly the very first?). Basically her age was her 'gimmick' that got her known in the mass media. It certainly can't have been because of her looks or her bust size, neither of which were that amazing.

The only other 16 year old page 3 girls who spring to mind are Linda Lusardi, LDM and Leah Harper. I'm sure there are more but I doubt it's a long list and considering the huge number of Page 3 girls there have been that says a lot about how successful you can expect to be.

Boring Bloke wrote:

> I'm not sure if you'd get too many under 18 year olds to
> model either, even if they want to do it. As Marcus points out,
> under 18 models still needs a parent / guardian to give their
> permission for nude work and the fact that so few such models
> are under 18 indicates that most parents aren't happy to sign!
>
> The only other 16 year old page 3 girls who spring to mind
> are Linda Lusardi, LDM and Leah Harper. I'm sure there are more
> but I doubt it's a long list and considering the huge number of
> Page 3 girls there have been that says a lot about how
> successful you can expect to be.
>

Here's an under 18 example-
who's also on the.....
site

make your own mind up whether it sits comfortably or not.