Forum - View topicNEWS: Virtual Child Porn Ban Bill Goes to UK House of Lords
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
Author | Message | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
boznia
Posts: 189 |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
Mad_Scientist
Subscriber
Moderator Posts: 3011 |
|
|||||||
After reading the a fair amount of that act, I don't think it would be. But a screenshot from Elfen Lied could be illegal, maybe. And no, I am not joking. Confused? Here's why. Any work classified by the BBFC or a similiar designated authority is automatically exempt from this. I'm fairly certain that Elfen Lied has been classified by the BBFC. Also, if I am understanding this bill correctly, it's not supposed to effect the classifying duties of any particular body, so hypothetically the BBFC would be able to continue classifying anime without worrying about this act. However, "extracts" from classified works are not exempt, if the following is true: "it is of such a nature that it must reasonably be assumed to have been extracted (whether with or without other images) solely or principally for the purpose of sexual arousal." That's vague enough where I can potentially see some of the scenes where Nana is naked as qualifying. Thus, Elfen Lied anime, ok. Screenshot of Elfen Lied anime, possibly illegal. And as for the Elfen Lied manga, which I don't believe has been released in the UK and therefore isn't classified? Well, part of the law has this to say: "Where (as found in the person’s possession) an image forms part of a series of images, the question whether the image is [pornographic, and therefore illegal] is to be determined by reference to— the image itself, and (if the series of images is such as to be capable of providing a context for the image) the context in which it occurs in the series of images. So, for example, where— an image forms an integral part of a narrative constituted by a series of images, and having regard to those images as a whole, they are not of such a nature that they must reasonably be assumed to have been produced solely or principally for the purpose of sexual arousal, the image may, by virtue of being part of that narrative, be found not to be pornographic, even though it might have been found to be pornographic if taken by itself." So the Elfen Lied manga might be ok, just make sure you keep the whole thing together and don't separate any of the images. Oh, and certain types of images would be illegal regardless of context, and one of the standards regarding those images is vague enough where it might apply to the Elfen Lied manga. Of course, if it was licensed and classified, it wouldn't matter. .... I have a feeling this law, if passed, is going to create some very weird double-triple-quadruple standards. EDIT: Actually, I realize the act may not be apply in as many cases as I though, because there is an "and" where I was thinking there was an "or". Thus, my impression may be mistaken... or maybe the act is phrased weirdly. Last edited by Mad_Scientist on Fri Mar 27, 2009 2:45 am; edited 3 times in total |
||||||||
enurtsol
Posts: 14790 |
|
|||||||
Heh, as mentioned before, making good points on both sides of the debate:
The key question is why one should need to do something about such material. That is not to defend it or advocate its possession: rather, it is to highlight concern that the current climate of hysteria over child protection makes it very difficult for our legislators to explore the underlying issues without the risk of having their motives questioned. The first and most important issue is whether this proposed law will make matters better – or worse. Existing laws on child porn have at their core the very reasonable contention that the mere existence – let alone circulation – of photos of child abuse contribute to the further abuse of a child. When it comes to wholly fictitious imagery, there is no direct harm. If the law is not simply premised on a desire to punish, then it needs to demonstrate either that it contributes to a reduction in longer term harm, or that it will do no worse than the status quo. The pictures in question may be odious, but do they "reinforce inappropriate feelings" - or do they act as a substitute for abuse? Moreover, if abusers have begun to collect cartoon images as a safer way to satisfy their fantasies, then could this law actually reinvigorate the market for real porn? Then there's also the question of what constitutes realistic enough in a cartoon depiction. A realistic sketch of kids drawn from pure imagination? A trace of a kiddie-porn photo but tweaked to be more cartoonish? Where to draw the line (pardon the pun)?
I guess, according to the way the bill is written: (6) Where an image shows a person the image is to be treated as an image of a child if— (a) the impression conveyed by the image is that the person shown is a child, or (b) the predominant impression conveyed is that the person shown is a child despite the fact that some of the physical characteristics shown are not those of a child. that it'll be like how America describes obscenity: they'll know it when they see it (up to community standards). |
||||||||
RoverTX
Posts: 424 |
|
|||||||
BBFC? From the states here, are they the British version of the FCC, or something different? I don't know much about the manga, except that its about ten times more explicit, edgy, and/or pushing all norms then the shows. (I liked the show but it pushed just about every last one of my buttons, so I know that I could never even try to read the manga. On top of that has it even been brought over to the states, the manga that is?) So going on that could it be possible that one of the manga's book in the series separated from the whole could be illegal while collected as a whole the series would be legal? I think what I am trying to ask here, is this line of separation come in the way said art work is published, or in the way in which some one could take things apart literally. God this is confusing. Too late to be thinking about this. |
||||||||
ConanSan
Posts: 1818 |
|
|||||||
The BBFC are goverment funded video nazi pirate dinosuars that rip shows to shreads and then chrage obscene amounts of money for thier "Services" (Double for anime because languages make things hard for thier poor dinosuar brains) which are nessasary for legal stocking in the UK.
|
||||||||
loka
Posts: 373 Location: Pittsburgh, PA |
|
|||||||
it's a dark horse type of manga, and people i talk to don't know why they haven't licensed it yet. a lot of people have been clamoring for it, as the story is much extended past the anime. |
||||||||
Mad_Scientist
Subscriber
Moderator Posts: 3011 |
|
|||||||
The BBFC is the British Board of Film Classification, their main ratings board. The people behind the UK's version of the R, PG-13, etc, ratings that movies get in the US, though I'm not sure exactly what the UK ratings are. Anyways, the BBFC rates films and (currently at least) also video games, and I'm fairly certain they rate anime series/moves as well. I'm pretty sure manga don't get rated at all, at least not by any offiicial body. Incidentally, the Elfen Lied manga has not been officially released in English in any country that I am aware of, but that doesn't stop people from reading it from scanlations or importing the Japanese versions, of course, and it might have been released in other languages like Chinese that I am not aware of. As far as I know, you wouldn't have to worry about the manga as a whole or a single book. Even a single chapter would have enough context and story to make it exempt... maybe. A lot of it depends on a certain part of the bill that I am unsure of. "A prohibited image is an image which— (a) is pornographic, (b) falls within subsection (6), and (c) is grossly offensive, disgusting or otherwise of an obscene character" The rest of the bill goes on about those three things. Whether something is "pornographic" can be affected by context, subsection (6) mostly deals with outlining specific sex acts and also applies if an image is focused on the genital or anal areas, and the "grossy offensive, etc" part is left completely vague. The thing I am curious about is, does an image have to fit all three of those things, a, b, and c, or does it need to fit only one? I originally thought it only needed to fall into one of those categories, but if my understanding of grammar is correct, the way the bill is worded should mean it would have to fall into all three. But requiring it to fall into all three categories is a bit redudant and also would leave some pretty big holes. |
||||||||
AoiHonou
Posts: 49 |
|
|||||||
That's just super.
British otakus will be forced to go "underground" just to watch the likes of Kodomo no Jikan, Strike Witches, and other loli-anime genres. Heck, just walking around holding and/or buying these DVDs might get you in jail. Wait, I just read a Lucky Star doujinshi featuring Konata-Kagami yuri scenes. Or wait, lemme see...I do think seeing Crayon Shin-chan showing his little weanie in the show falls to this also. Or Goku in the classic Dragon Ball anime fighting a dinosaur naked also falls for this. Bloody hell, now I committed a crime when this bill passes into a law. |
||||||||
Axe-336
Posts: 143 Location: Springfield, VA |
|
|||||||
With anime and manga it gets so complicated though y'know? That prepubescent lolita in the clutch of some friendly tentacles might actually be a 200 year old spirit gettin' its kicks, or a cyborg with the brain of a kinky 35 year old woman.
|
||||||||
Axe-336
Posts: 143 Location: Springfield, VA |
|
|||||||
You're equating nudity and pornography, they aren't the same thing. Classical artists have tons of nudes hanging in famous art galleries, heck the Sistine chapel is full of nekkid people. It's not like they're gonna ban "My Neighbor Totoro". |
||||||||
Zin5ki
Posts: 6680 Location: London, UK |
|
|||||||
I cannot say my state of mind is a good one at this moment. Mohawk suggested earlier that the bill would lose steam if it reached the Lords, but since it has got to such a stage without a substitution of the word 'publication' for 'possesion', I fear for the worst here.
Some have told me that If the BBFC don't rate a DVD in this country, said DVD is technically illegal. They charge hefty amounts for the consumers' mandatory privilege of it being rated. Be thankful.
When I last read through the bill before it had reached this stage, 'child' was defined as any person under the age of 18. That's one of my chief concerns with this legislation. |
||||||||
Onizuka666
Posts: 266 Location: U.K |
|
|||||||
If this does become law, I just don't see how it will be enforceable. Someone else gets to decide on what I consume or create, in my spare time and privacy.
Being from the U.K, there's a lot of anime I still buy on import, let alone plenty of anime and manga online. With manga, I think there's less chance of it being caught up, since the majority of manga fans either import theirs, but them through anime stores or read scanlations online. For someone out there, to try and police all this content is one hell of a task. I agree that every year the U.K seems to becoming some kind of draconian state. These kinds of laws are really masked to look like they are actually doing something. Its more fear laced pages from a 1984 book. As for the BBFC ratings, I have a lot of import anime, because its not on sale in the U.K, my most recent purchase being Gatchaman Vol 1 tv series. I ordered it from the U.S and it got through customs fine. Besides, you never see any hentai getting a U.K release these days, especially with fans wanting more content for their money. Those that do want it, easily know where to look online or on import. The other interesting thing is, you can't legislate for peoples individual tastes. And its never been proved that such material doesn't curb these urges that pedos have. What they will also find out, is that a lot of those that create/consume a lot of anime/manga are male and female The day I get arrested for reading manga or watching anime, is the day I call the author/artist to testify in my defence. Lets hope this jumped up law gets shot down. If I decide to create an online manga (with what they class as questionable), I'd like to see them try and shut it down. |
||||||||
hikaru004
Posts: 2306 |
|
|||||||
It looks like an obscenity law like the US has only it goes after vitual images. I'm still not seeing the big deal here.
It's about time a country took a stance. |
||||||||
CCSYueh
Posts: 2707 Location: San Diego, CA |
|
|||||||
I would think not banning fictional characters would be considered a stance. Or do you mean it's about time someone protected the youth of the world by banning Goku from doing his little "pat-pat" to see if someone is male or female? What if an author were moved to write a story about a child who has been abused as the background for the character's behavior in the story? What if someone were motivated to make a comic about the Austrian father who had those kids with his daughter he kept locked away all those years? We're protecting the children world by not talking about stuff? I think you need to re-assess things. We've had several incidents of teachers & students locally recently--just last night a teacher & her 13 yr old student. The DA on the case was asked if she thought the increased reporting meant a rise in such crimes being committed & she (intelligently by my book) said she believes it's more children are being better informed on reporting these issues, not that there's been an actual increase in teens being sexually used/abused by adults. However, to the "monster in every closet" type who wants to lock up every adult that smiles at a child that isn't that adult's child, I'm sure they perceive it as these crimes are increasing because we see them on the news more. Actually, we've swung back & forth on this issue, Hikaru. Do you remember the McMartin Preschool molestation case? We had a similar one here in San Diego. Before you go insisting that there's fire everywhere there's smoke, you need to examine those cases for balance. In an horrible attempt to protect the children under the mistaken belief children would not make up stories, more than a few adults have been falsely labeled child molester. The investigators on these cases didn't know what they were doing & asked questions in a manner that resulted in the children claiming stuff happened that never, ever did. The local pre-school case I'm thinking of had the molestors killing & burying a giraffe as a threat to keep the kids quiet as I recall (because it's so easy to get one's hands on a giraffe). But we're in scary times. When things fall apart as they have right now, people get more conservative--contracting as it were. The world is scary, so they want to think they have some control over something whether they really do or not. They want to protect what they can of their own because their stocks & retirement accounts have turned into dust & blown away in the wind. I really hope Mohawk's right & the House of Lords blows this away, but I fear the current climate is more likely to inspire a more draconian outlook. I mean, my god, look what rights Bush blew threw in the wake of 9-11 in the name of protecting the American public. |
||||||||
mufurc
Posts: 612 |
|
|||||||
I fail to see how that constitutes "sexual situation" (though I suppose some people would disagree...).
Again, this is not pornography (unless the story is written in a pornographic manner in which case I'd be all for banning it).
I don't see anything like that in the bill.
Actually, I think people should chill and stop blowing things out of proportion. It says here that "The proposed offence has been carefully constructed to target the material which causes most concern and is at the extreme end of the spectrum. Images will have to meet certain conditions to be considered illegal." We're talking about porn not any animated image that happens to look like a child. Yes, the bill would probably influence stuff like Kodomo no jikan, Elfen lied, Strike Witches, etc. Yes, the bill is problematic in many ways. But it doesn't mean that if it passes the police would arrest you for watching Dragon Ball or reading the newspaper. There's no need to be overly dramatic about it. Christ. Last edited by mufurc on Fri Mar 27, 2009 11:16 am; edited 1 time in total |
||||||||
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
||
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group