egafd.com

This may sound a daft question, but as you know in the UK only films are classified not stills.

In other words, you can put a full set of hard core photographs on CD rom or DVD and sell them (I belive) no problem.

A film is a set of photographs that change slightly each frame (or pic) to give the impreshion of movement.

I am not sure what the frame rate per sec of a DVD, but say its 25fps.

My question would be, at what fps (frame per sec) does a film become a set of photographs just loading up one after another. If you had a set up of 1fps this may be considered an animation, rather than a film, but what if you had a set up of 4 frames a min.

Why am I going on about frame rate?

Well, my thought is, you could record DVD's say at 4 frames a min, and call this a set of photographs rather than film. The sound would be the same as normall, so rather than watching a flow of frames, you may be watching more of a jerking movement.

I am saying this as I think this would get around the UK film censor board, allowing people top sell porn on DVD or VHS without the worry of film censors.

OK this may seem daft, but it may work.

Lets face it, these tapes could be sold very cheap.

Again, it comes down to what is a film.

.......I assume that kids' flick-books might also be subject to censorship.

Nice try Phil. John and I speculated on this very subject a couple of years ago and we came to the same conclusion: No one would be desperate enough to subscribe to it. Correction: Not enough people will be desperate enough to subscribe to it to make it work. The only substitute for the moving image (video, DVD etc) is the still image (mags and the like) and never the twain shall meet. Except m-pegs/ j-pegs on websites of course.

I'm no legal expert and I don't claim to be 100% certain, but as I understand the BBFC have jurisdiction over the medium itself(video/DVD) regardless of frame-rate.

What counts is that the material is being distributed to others. To distribute legally, through legal sex shops, the BBFC must clasify/censor. To do so without BBFC blessing is illegal and was (? still is) liable to legal grief and even a fine of ?20K. I may be wrong about the situation now, but selling non-classified stuff via mail order or without sex shop licence was/is illegal.

BWT, stills can still, i think, be actioned against under the Obscene Publications legislation or acts designed to protect children etc. Obviously it's the paedophile material that plod is most interested in (& rightly so) but don't think that the old censorious legal framework has gone all together.

As I understand matters, the UK has not legalised hardcore; rather what we might call 'mainstream' porn is no longer actioned against under the notion that it will 'deprave and corrupt' in the terms used by the OPA. The law has (finally) been reintpreted to match what has been public opinion for 25 years or more, but I don't think the authorities are willing to see a free for all. It's a question of where the regulatory authorities are applying the law. Low-key, non paedophile stuff is at the moment not targeted, but once something becomes commercial in scale I would not be surprised if there were some interest from the regulatory authorities.

Just my opinions, I'm not an expert & I don't mean to sound like a know all. This is what I think is the score from what I've read over the years.

Tata,
DC