It hasn't been mentioned as far as I can see this time around but the extremely vague "material with intent to arouse" could cover just about anything. I'm just watching for new updates from open rights group, obscenity lawyer, and Pandora Blake x





It hasn't been mentioned as far as I can see this time around but the extremely vague "material with intent to arouse" could cover just about anything. I'm just watching for new updates from open rights group, obscenity lawyer, and Pandora Blake x
Just so you know, First Choice no longer accepts private loads, if thats what you were talking about earlier (not quite awake yet!)





Just came across this - https://www.openrightsgroup.org/pres...king-proposals
May 12, 2017
FOI response reveals porn company’s proposals for UK to block millions of porn sites
A Freedom of Information request to the DCMS has revealed that porn company MindGeek suggested that the BBFC should potentially block millions of porn sites if they didn’t comply with Age Verification requirements outlined in the Digital Economy Act.
MindGeek, who are also developing Age Verification technology, said that the Government’s plans to prevent children from seeing pornography would not be effective unless millions of sites could be blocked.
Notes made by the company and sent to the DCMS state:
“A greylist of 4M URLs already exists from Sky, but lets assume that’s actually much smaller as these URLs will I suspect, be page- level blocks, not TLDs. The regulator should contact them all within that 12 months, explaining that if they do not demonstrate they are AV ready by the enforcement date then they will be enforced against. “On the enforcement date, all sites on the greylist turn black or white depending upon what they have demonstrated to the regulator.”
MindGeek could stand to gain commercially if competitor websites are blocked from UK visitors, or if the industry takes up their Age Verification product.
Executive Director of Open Rights Group, Jim Killock said:
“There is nothing in the Act to stop the BBFC from blocking 4.6 million pornographic websites. The only constraint is cash.
“This leaves the BBFC wide open to pressure for mass website blocking without any need for a change in the law.”
When giving evidence to the Public Bill Committee, the chief executive of the British Board of Film Classification, David Austin implied that only tens of sites would be targeted:
“We would start with the top 50 and work our way through those, but we would not stop there. We would look to get new data every quarter, for example. As you say, sites will come in and out of popularity. We will keep up to date and focus on those most popular sites for children.”
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Follow me on Twitter @ClassyKatyxxx





PornHub's Owner is About to Card Everybody in the UK - https://www.inverse.com/article/3131...-pandora-blake
"expected to require websites to check user ages using a regulator-approved verification method starting in May 2018."
"Blake explained that the economics behind age verification will hit small businesses hard. MindGeek, Blake said, will charge £0.05 ($0.07) to age-verify each visitor, where cell carriers will charge £0.10 ($0.13) per visitor. Her website receives around 3,000 visitors per day, and around 0.01 percent of those are paying customers. She makes around £1,000 ($1,29per month from the website, but age verification through the cell carrier will cost £300 ($389) per day."
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Follow me on Twitter @ClassyKatyxxx




Such a nanny state! It's the responsibility of parents to 'parent' a childs activity on the internet not the Governments! There are plenty of parental blocking software options!





I've been sharing it on Twitter...there's an election coming up and we want this repealed, along with all the other restrictions and surveillance being introduced. I would say it's turning into a police State rather than a nanny State but our police forces are being drastically cut.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Follow me on Twitter @ClassyKatyxxx




Yes aren't they just. Politicians get 11% pay rises our police (who put their lives in danger day in day out) get 1% and a shot load of additional work because of the cuts.
I've not looked into it yet but are Labour offering a 'soft' Brexit option where we stay within the European Court of human rights? (Although I thought this was separate from the EU) If so they won't allow it surely.


I agree! If parents don't make the effort to use parental blocks, then these kids shouldn't be allowed on the Internet. Their incompetence potentially effects hundreds of thousands of legit businesses. That poor lady who would have to pay £300 a day...its so bad!
Weren't they trying to ban female orgasms? Or something absolutely crazy sexist and ridiculous like that? Bdsm?








I get the impression from this article is that clients would be age verified once then they have access on a continuous basis, they create an account, are age verified then can log in and access content from then on with no other age verifications.
In reagrds to the cost, surely this can be passed on to the client for a capped off payment of £1.00 for example. In fact mobile companies already do it, if you want to access adult content on your mobile using mobile data you need a card to age verify and you pay the £1.00 which is taken off your next months bill. i dont think anyone ever got into an uproar over this and i imagine this is what will be rolled out to each adult content site. technically the phone companies shouldnt be doing this as if you are already in a contract then they have your ID and age on file but hay ho.
going to parental controls, all internet providers are supposed to swich them on automatically at sign up and its up to the account payer to decide to then switch them off but most just ask if you want the child safe on or off. thing is with child safe filters being on means that it block every little thing and not just porn or violence, you cant even purchase wine on your weekly food shop! this is where the system fails, of course the option should be there to block porn and violence fo those that do not want access to it but it should give options for other things to be filtered if wanted too such as wine and tabacoo products, more kinky lingerie and anything else that may be deemed un PG.
Just my thoughts so far on the matter. In some respects i want to wait and see what is bought in and legally used, it could be something as little as just entering your date of birth without anything else being required. I also do think that the big box office sites will comply due to the amount of british clients that they have and that more and more countries are going this way by implementing laws. they would prefer to implement and stay in business and make massive profits rather then closing down altogether. This could also end the whole free pron freeloader issue as well and bring us more money.
I deserve the life i want. To be adored by men, treated like a princess and to be indulged. I deserve nothing but a life of luxury.





Just in case you needed yet another reason to not vote for them on the 8th http://www.independent.co.uk/life-st...-a7744176.html
I am really confused. If this law does not extend to live webcam broadcast how will it effect MFC and SM?
I like my coffee like I like my men...in a plastic cup.










All porn sites have to use age verification or have access from the UK blocked and card usage blocked. There are also restrictions on what videos/images/writing can contain.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Follow me on Twitter @ClassyKatyxxx
I'm going to be real and say this is confusing af to me. I'm USA based but wondering how this effects solo websites. If we have a solo site do we have to put our whole site behind a paid wall? If so I don't see how that's going to work our site is gears customers towards paying for a membership, cam show, text packages or any other pay to view/pay to play content.





[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Follow me on Twitter @ClassyKatyxxx





http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-40630582
A nine-month countdown to the introduction of compulsory age checks on online pornography seen from the UK has begun.
The April 2018 goal to protect under-18s was revealed as digital minister Matt Hancock signed the commencement order for the Digital Economy Act, which introduces the requirement.
Credit cards
The age-check requirement applies to any website or other online platform that provides pornography "on a commercial basis" to people in the UK.
It allows a regulator to fine any business that refuses to comply and to ask third-party payment services to withdraw support.
The watchdog will also be able to force internet providers to block access to non-compliant services.
Ministers have suggested one of several ways this might work would be for pornographic sites to demand credit card details before providing any access, since in the UK consumers typically have to be over 18 to have a card of their own.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Follow me on Twitter @ClassyKatyxxx










Presumably "commercial basis" means that they are selling a service. It's going to cover all the sites that we work on and ones that we don't. Adultwork had already been getting itself ready for this.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Follow me on Twitter @ClassyKatyxxx





I wonder how this will effect Twitter, if at all, there is (as we know) a lot of porn on there. Im confused, are we protecting kids from all porn or just the porn that is for sale?
Bookmarks