Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsObscenity law in doubt after jury acquits distributor of gay pornography {uk}
http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/jan/07/obscene-publications-act-future-doubtMichael Peacock at Southwark Crown Court during the case, brought under the Obscene Publications Act. Photograph: Lewis Whyld/PA
It was the law used in the controversial prosecution of Lady Chatterley's Lover. Now the Obscene Publications Act, which came into force in 1959, appears to be on its last legs.
On Friday, in one of the most significant cases of recent years, a London jury rejected prosecution claims that gay pornography depicting acts that are legal between consenting adults were capable of "depraving and corrupting" those who watched them on DVDs.
The case, at Southwark crown court, threatens to have implications far beyond the acquittal of pornographer Michael Peacock, who ran a mail-order business and had been targeted by an undercover vice officer.
Officials at the British Board of Film Classification, as well as police officers involved in prosecuting obscenity cases, have admitted that the current laws on what is obscene may require a major rethink.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 1873 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (3)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Obscenity law in doubt after jury acquits distributor of gay pornography {uk} (Original Post)
xchrom
Jan 2012
OP
Quartermass
(457 posts)1. Good news.
While I do find some stuff disgusting, it's none of my business if somebody else likes to be disgusted in the privacy of their own home. It's nobody else's business either. You may not like it, but so what. As long as they keep it private and to themselves, and as long as it's between two consenting adults that aren't harming anyone, there should be no problems.
It's all about choice, and allowing people to have their own choice.
saras
(6,670 posts)2. Actually, good porn is repraving, not DEpraving at all.
William769
(55,147 posts)3. Good news.