how-to block ads
|
|
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
1 edit | reply to funchords
Re: Andrew Cuomo needs to create the appearance of a problem... said by funchords:2. Is paid by the porn industry to plant fake files on P2P networks that, when viewed, drive the viewer to the porn-operators site When discussing the "war" waged by Opportunist NYAG Cuomo, let's be more specific when tossing around the general term "porn." We're talking about purveyors of child pornography here. Adult porn is still legal and is protected by the 1st Amendment. | |
 funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5
2 edits | said by funchords:2. Is paid by the porn industry to plant fake files on P2P networks that, when viewed, drive the viewer to the porn-operators site said by SilverSurfer1:When discussing the "war" waged by Opportunist NYAG Cuomo, let's be more specific when tossing around the general term "porn." We're talking about purveyors of child pornography here. Agreed. I don't think there's an advertising budget within any child pornography industry, but thanks for clarifying that just in case someone wasn't sure.
said by SilverSurfer1:Adult porn is still legal and is protected by the 1st Amendment. My complaint about MediaDefender and the (adult) porn industry is that they inject fake files and search results into the P2P networks to lure users to their sites -- users, who are not necessarily adults. Giving ones porn ad for "fetishsite.com" the same title as the search terms someone just used, such as "building implosions", is probably not speech protected by the first amendment.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
| | |
|
 major marcoRes Firma Mitescere NescitPremium
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA | said by funchords:My complaint about MediaDefender and the (adult) porn industry is that they inject fake files and search results into the P2P networks to lure users to their sites -- users, who are not necessarily adults. Giving ones porn ad for "fetishsite.com" the same title as the search terms someone just used, such as "building implosions", is probably not speech protected by the first amendment. That may be so, but I've noticed that you have a nasty little habit of speaking in glittering generalities no matter what your opinion is on this site for any given topic. Someone corrected you so don't get your panties in a wad over it.
--
The Toll
Tracking Lord Stanley
| |
funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5 | Since my "panties" aren't "in a wad" about anything, I think you have misinterpreted something. SilverSurfer has not said anything that I disagree with.
said by major marco:That may be so, but I've noticed that you have a nasty little habit of speaking in glittering generalities no matter what your opinion is on this site for any given topic. For example? said by major marco:Someone corrected you so don't get your panties in a wad over it. People correct me every day, and I have invited and embraced that and I thank them for it.
In this case, I don't see any glaring corrections. In fact, SilverSurfer took what may be seen as a generality of porn and clarified that it was distinct from child porn. I'm perfectly okay with that, since I meant that from the beginning.
Welcome to our violent agreement.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
| |
|
