Outlaw of Romance Writing

[jaF0]

I have a legit question concerning this claim. In the US, is the website's liability dependent on the state where it is registered, or are websites strictly under federal jurisdiction?

Interstate Commerce and communications generally fall under US Law. Challenges may begin in state courts, but will likely end up in Federal courts. Lit's rules specifically state US Code.


"Visual representations (photographs or video) of any real person engaged in “actual sexually explicit conduct” as defined by 18 U.S.C. 2257."

https://www.literotica.com/resources/content-guidelines

I ask this because there are other long-time story sites with more lax rules - such as SOL, where you can post sexual content involving teenagers, for example. There is also AO3 where there are practically no limitations whatsoever. There, you can post bestiality, sex involving infants and toddlers, outright rape, etc.
So my question is, if legal issues are such a concerning thing, how is it that these websites are still up and running? It's a genuine question as these arguments often come up.

They have not yet been challenged apparently. That does not mean they won't be.

There have also been grey areas protecting written word. Those protections may be falling.

Hustler magazine took it on the chin for the other magazines of the time. They won. It is unlikely they would win today as there was a different reality then.

 

[SinclairGroupLLP]

Hustler magazine took it on the chin for the other magazines of the time. They won. It is unlikely they would win today as there was a different reality then.

I disagree. I think the case against Flynt wouldn't even be brought today. There's no stomach for it anymore, and the stuff that he did back then that was considered so obscene is not something anybody bats an eye at these days.

Things have been getting far less strict over the years, not stricter.

Again, the only areas that really ever gain traction when it comes to porn regulation are the ones based on child sexual abuse material and age restrictions. Content restrictions are almost unheard of these days - if it's legal to engage in the behavior, it tends to be legal to film it and show it to people.

 

[alohadave]

I ask this because there are other long-time story sites with more lax rules - such as SOL, where you can post sexual content involving teenagers, for example

AFAICT, SOL isn't hosted in the US. I always thought Canada, but I can't find any confirmation of that.

 

[SimonDoom]

They have not yet been challenged apparently. That does not mean they won't be.

There have also been grey areas protecting written word. Those protections may be falling.

Hustler magazine took it on the chin for the other magazines of the time. They won. It is unlikely they would win today as there was a different reality then.

I don't pretend to have a crystal ball about the future, but there's no basis for this fear. There is no trend among federal courts that indicates this is likely to happen.

 

[KittyOfSteele]

Aren't we supposed to be the creative people who have optimism and pursue to follow higher values?

I'm an angry woman living in an actual dystopia that went completely Orwellian at the latter half of last year, and I was one of the unlucky hundreds of thousands who got hunted down by the regime for performing a civic duty that, if I didn't perform, I would be arrested anyway. Talk about a witch tryal.

The friend who bestowed in me the pen name that I'm using is currently serving 12 years in prison just for being a cam girl.

I am a rebellious artist who's had enough of being pushed over by the government, and whose gender identity has been used as a political and religious chip to play around with in order to justify oppressive measures and hate. If this makes me and my art transgressive, then I'll proudly be a libertine transgressor, because I am done with playing nice. I want you to go back in time and tell Marquis de Sade that he should be optimistic and pursue higher values as he's penning 120 Days of Sodom in the Bastille. He'll laugh at your face for even saying "optimism." Art was, is, and will always be, the first tool of the rebels. Punk exists because of it. The most impactful art will always come from dark places, and that includes, dire circumstances.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

AFAICT, SOL isn't hosted in the US. I always thought Canada, but I can't find any confirmation of that.

The server is in New Jersey.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

The server is in New Jersey.

And AO3 is hosted in San Francisco.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

And finally, Literotica is hosted in New York.

 

[RejectReality]

I don't pretend to have a crystal ball about the future, but there's no basis for this fear. There is no trend among federal courts that indicates this is likely to happen.

Depends upon whether there's some inciting incident. If something particularly bad goes down where one of these laws are working their way through the courts, that could potentially shift the larger public sentiment enough for the cases to gain some traction.

Thing is, there are a lot bigger fish to fry right now. No matter what side of the fence you're on, it's going to take something horrendous to catch anyone's attention enough for an issue like this to break through. While the current makeup of the government and courts might seem rife with potential to push this sort of thing, there's way too fucking much other stuff happening. I don't see this gaining any traction for about four years. LOL

 

[lovecraft68]

Depends upon whether there's some inciting incident. If something particularly bad goes down where one of these laws are working their way through the courts, that could potentially shift the larger public sentiment enough for the cases to gain some traction.

Thing is, there are a lot bigger fish to fry right now. No matter what side of the fence you're on, it's going to take something horrendous to catch anyone's attention enough for an issue like this to break through. While the current makeup of the government and courts might seem rife with potential to push this sort of thing, there's way too fucking much other stuff happening. I don't see this gaining any traction for about four years. LOL

In the publishing market that "Pedo handbook" being published on Amazon created a huge purge, mostly of taboo material, but a few other things.

Typical of how things work, Amazon let's this thing through their 'screening' even though it was completely transparent as to what it was, and somehow a book about how to pick up and molest children turned into a witch hunt of 18+ consensual incest stories (that sold like wildfire no less) and some other genres being banned.

Proof that as you say, one incident cannot just fast track some knee jerk reaction, but often times not even in the right direction.

In the case I mentioned, the real issue should have been Amazon not giving a fraction of a fuck what they let through.

Which is why, if something were to trigger a vast porn scrutiny, this site could be in the crosshairs.

 

[jaF0]

Which is why, if something were to trigger a vast porn scrutiny, this site could be in the crosshairs.

Which is what's pissing me off with these discussions.

'It's never happened before'.


To which my response it ... 'it's never been this way before'. Or in the immortal words of Guinan,:

=============

GUINAN: We need to talk. Somehow this, this is all wrong. This is not the way it's supposed to be.

PICARD: You must have some idea how things have changed.

GUINAN: I look at things, I look at people, and they just don't feel right.

PICARD: What things? What people?

==========

The only way out was to risk everything and return to the rift.

 

[SinclairGroupLLP]

Proof that as you say, one incident cannot just fast track some knee jerk reaction, but often times not even in the right direction.

In the case I mentioned, the real issue should have been Amazon not giving a fraction of a fuck what they let through.

Which is why, if something were to trigger a vast porn scrutiny, this site could be in the crosshairs.

There is no point sitting around worrying about “could.” Anything could conceivably happen. The issue is whether it’s likely and whether there’s any indication that it is happening. And the answer to both of those questions is no, it’s not likely, and no, there are no indications of some kind of wave of puritanism sweeping the country. If anything, it’s the opposite.

Which is what's pissing me off with these discussions.

'It's never happened before'.


To which my response it ... 'it's never been this way before

This is the problem - it HAS been this way before. In fact, it;s been far, far worse, at least if we are still talking about governmental attempts to censor pornography. No one can seriously make an argument that the state of the law today is worse than it was in the 1950s, when not only was pornography illegal, sending it through the mail got both the sender and receivers imprisoned, and things like interracial marriage, oral sex and cohabitation of non-married people was illegal and actually prosecuted.

I mean, seriously guys. Be realistic.

 

[RejectReality]

There is no point sitting around worrying about “could.” Anything could conceivably happen. The issue is whether it’s likely and whether there’s any indication that it is happening. And the answer to both of those questions is no, it’s not likely, and no, there are no indications of some kind of wave of puritanism sweeping the country. If anything, it’s the opposite.



This is the problem - it HAS been this way before. In fact, it;s been far, far worse, at least if we are still talking about governmental attempts to censor pornography. No one can seriously make an argument that the state of the law today is worse than it was in the 1950s, when not only was pornography illegal, sending it through the mail got both the sender and receivers imprisoned, and things like interracial marriage, oral sex and cohabitation of non-married people was illegal and actually prosecuted.

I mean, seriously guys. Be realistic.

People are freaking out because of who's in control of government, and the makeup of the supreme court. On paper, absent everything else going on, that could indeed be a scary prospect. You just have to ignore the dozens of other things that are going to get advanced way faster than some porn bill, and pretend there isn't going to be a new lawsuit every couple of days for the next four years. You also have some ( as many as 3 ) swingy supremes looking for gimmes to offset the perception of bias by siding with the justices on the left, and this sort of thing is perfect for that, if it even gets there.

 

[SimonDoom]

People are freaking out because of who's in control of government, and the makeup of the supreme court. On paper, absent everything else going on, that could indeed be a scary prospect. You just have to ignore the dozens of other things that are going to get advanced way faster than some porn bill, and pretend there isn't going to be a new lawsuit every couple of days for the next four years. You also have some ( as many as 3 ) swingy supremes looking for gimmes to offset the perception of bias by siding with the justices on the left, and this sort of thing is perfect for that, if it even gets there.

The fears about the Supreme Court are, in my opinion, wildly exaggerated. People are worried, but they've never actually read a Supreme Court opinion. There's ZERO evidence that this Supreme Court has an anti-erotica agenda. If you actually read the opinions, which I do, there's a libertarian streak among some of the Justices, like Gorsuch and Kavanagh, and an institutionally conservative attitude by Justices such as Roberts, that makes it very unlikely that the Court is going to overturn 50 years of precedent and support the criminalization of erotic writings. It's a huge nothingburger.

 

[lovecraft68]

The fears about the Supreme Court are, in my opinion, wildly exaggerated. People are worried, but they've never actually read a Supreme Court opinion. There's ZERO evidence that this Supreme Court has an anti-erotica agenda. If you actually read the opinions, which I do, there's a libertarian streak among some of the Justices, like Gorsuch and Kavanagh, and an institutionally conservative attitude by Justices such as Roberts, that makes it very unlikely that the Court is going to overturn 50 years of precedent and support the criminalization of erotic writings. It's a huge nothingburger.

Maybe if people would stop watching MSNBC and CNN they might not be so hysterical about pretty much everything.

I'm one of the many who no longer watch any mainstream media, the independent content creators are much better at giving facts over agendas and trying to get everyone to hate everyone else.

I think its both the right thing to do, and hilarious to see the reaction of the MSM snots, that they are now letting these people into press brieflings.

Might actually get some real news reported now.

 

[SimonDoom]

Maybe if people would stop watching MSNBC and CNN they might not be so hysterical about pretty much everything.

I'm one of the many who no longer watch any mainstream media, the independent content creators are much better at giving facts over agendas and trying to get everyone to hate everyone else.

I think its both the right thing to do, and hilarious to see the reaction of the MSM snots, that they are now letting these people into press brieflings.

Might actually get some real news reported now.

I think whether you watch CNN, Foxnews, or MSNBC, you have to take the attitude that you are watching propaganda. You have to watch carefully and with a filter and take whatever news and real information you can glean from it. Everything now is slanted. It's very difficult to find anything that is in any meaningful sense "objective." You can still get information, but you have to be an alert and active consumer of information.

 

[bumpercars]

The fears about the Supreme Court are, in my opinion, wildly exaggerated...there's a libertarian streak among some of the Justices, like Gorsuch and Kavanagh, and an institutionally conservative attitude by Justices such as Roberts, that makes it very unlikely that the Court is going to overturn 50 years of precedent and support the criminalization of erotic writings.

The biggest decision made by the current court was Dobbs, in which Gorsuch and Kavanaugh showed no signs of libertarian ideas about who has rights to people's bodies, and in which Roberts cheerfully overturned about fifty years of precedent.

I certainly hope that this court wouldn't support efforts to ban porn, but I'm not going to put any faith in their wisdom or principles.

 

[SimonDoom]

The biggest decision made by the current court was Dobbs, in which Gorsuch and Kavanaugh showed no signs of libertarian ideas about who has rights to people's bodies, and in which Roberts cheerfully overturned about fifty years of precedent.

I certainly hope that this court wouldn't support efforts to ban porn, but I'm not going to put any faith in their wisdom or principles.

Abortion is a sui generis issue. There are libertarians who are anti-abortion because they believe that a fetus is a life and therefore is entitled as an individual to the protection of the law. Whatever one thinks of Dobbs, it doesn't indicate in any way how the Court might rule on free speech issues. Scalia was clearly opposed to Roe but also authored the Texas v Johnson opinion holding that burning an American flag was protected by the First Amendment. I think it's likely that Roberts, Gorsuch, Kavanagh, and Barrett would have similar views if tested. That's seven votes against criminalization. I don't think we have anything to worry about.

 

[StillStunned]

I'm an angry woman living in an actual dystopia that went completely Orwellian at the latter half of last year, and I was one of the unlucky hundreds of thousands who got hunted down by the regime for performing a civic duty that, if I didn't perform, I would be arrested anyway. Talk about a witch tryal.

The friend who bestowed in me the pen name that I'm using is currently serving 12 years in prison just for being a cam girl.

I am a rebellious artist who's had enough of being pushed over by the government, and whose gender identity has been used as a political and religious chip to play around with in order to justify oppressive measures and hate. If this makes me and my art transgressive, then I'll proudly be a libertine transgressor, because I am done with playing nice. I want you to go back in time and tell Marquis de Sade that he should be optimistic and pursue higher values as he's penning 120 Days of Sodom in the Bastille. He'll laugh at your face for even saying "optimism." Art was, is, and will always be, the first tool of the rebels. Punk exists because of it. The most impactful art will always come from dark places, and that includes, dire circumstances.

I'm quoting you here not because I have anything useful to add to the discussion, but because the people carrying on the discussion seem to have glossed over it. A lot of back and forth about the law, and what might happen and why it won't, but no acknowledgment that, from what you say, you're actually living it.

I don't know where you are, and nothing I can say can change your situation, but for what it's worth I wish you all the best with your struggles.

 

[alohadave]

Maybe we should lay off the direct politics or move the thread to the bad place.

 

[RejectReality]

Yep. Please keep it as neutral as possible so we don't all end up in the Politics dungeon. LOL The free speech angle is what makes it likely the swingy supremes will take the gimme of impartial perception if it ever got there. It's an easy argument that forces people to talk out of both sides of their mouth if they want to complain about such a decision and scream from the rafters about free speech and cutting out censorship at the same time.

Not that the talking heads are in any way above doing that, but at least they look foolish in the process.

 

[madelinemasoch]

I hate how threads like this full of dishonest logic bro argument and artiste manque timewasting are more popular than what’s actually interesting and original.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

I hate how threads like this full of dishonest logic bro argument and artiste manque timewasting are more popular than what’s actually interesting and original.

There is truth in your words. Threads where we actually talk about stories and writing? (other than our own) They rarely get to page two before dying out completely. But threads about prosaic stuff like memes and word games, about ratings, threads where we link our stuff and boast, yeah, those always seem to flourish. It's what AH is.

Although this particular thread, digressions aside, is about freedom of speech, so it's not a waste of time.

 

[SimonDoom]

I hate how threads like this full of dishonest logic bro argument and artiste manque timewasting are more popular than what’s actually interesting and original.

But the topic of free speech is essential to the subject of being an artist, isn't it? How do we talk honestly about what we're doing without being able to talk about that? To me, it seems weird that we have to tiptoe around the very foundation of our ability to write the stories we want to write. It seems fake and phony to me. As an artist I want to have the maximum freedom possible to express what I want to express, and I support the freedom of other authors, too, to write what they want. I suppose it's political, in a way, but it's inseparable from what we're doing here.

 

[madelinemasoch]

But the topic of free speech is essential to the subject of being an artist, isn't it? How do we talk honestly about what we're doing without being able to talk about that? To me, it seems weird that we have to tiptoe around the very foundation of our ability to write the stories we want to write. It seems fake and phony to me. As an artist I want to have the maximum freedom possible to express what I want to express, and I support the freedom of other authors, too, to write what they want. I suppose it's political, in a way, but it's inseparable from what we're doing here.

Yes, so do I. I was just saying, in that situation, take it as an opportunity to improve, because you probably wouldn’t have the ability to repeal the law on your own.

This has been interpreted as being pro-censorship when I literally said obscenity laws shouldn’t exist in the USA because of the first amendment.