ISPs blocking stuff ?

[Platypus]

I don't understand..?

My comment was in poor taste.

As I'm sure you know, there must be something sexual about the image for it to be deemed indecent.

Therefore naked != porn

[NotAllThere]

Didn't the Yardbirds or Cream have a nekkid thirteen year old girl on one of their albums?

[OwlHoot]

Talk about a storm in a teacup. As Platypus said above, it's easy to find the image, and the girl could easily be a slightly flat-chested adult, although the postage-stamp-sized image I found isn't that distinct. (Looks like it might make a good avatar to wind people up though )

There was a kiddie porn case in the UK last year which went to court at vast expense to the taxpayer but eventually collapsed when it turned out that all the pictures in question were of a well-known Californian flat-chested porn model in her 20s! I forget her name though, some German sounding name as I recall.

[EternalOptimist]

There was a kiddie porn case in the UK last year which went to court at vast expense to the taxpayer but eventually collapsed when it turned out that all the pictures in question were of a well-known Californian flat-chested porn model in her 20s! I forget her name though, some German sounding name as I recall.

Beaver Braun , IIRC

[Board Game Geek]

I've not seen the image.

Though I do wonder, if it has been banned, because it is deemed as child pornography, then are not all the people googling the image to look at it not guilty of child pornography viewing ?

Of which the ISP's will no doubt log your activity ?

Knocks on the door at 2am I think....

[deano]

Didn't the Yardbirds or Cream have a nekkid thirteen year old girl on one of their albums?

Almost. It was Blind Faith (Claptons new "Supergroup" after Cream). The cover caused controversy at the time, but it's still available and you can view it at Amazon.

[OwlHoot]

There's another aspect to this though. The zealots behind this censorship, the Internet Watch Foundation [ http://www.internetwatch.org.uk/ ], are a charity part-financed by the EU and apparently have contacts within the UK Government.

So what next? Today a fairly innocent picture of a teenager (OK maybe a bit young and slightly iffy), but tomorrow censorship of any image or news article or blog the Government might deem contrary to public policy?

[Board Game Geek]

tomorrow censorship of any image or news article or blog the Government might deem contrary to public policy?

Hmm...the law of unintended (or possibly intended) consequences eh ?

[juststarting]

There's another aspect to this though. The zealots behind this censorship, the Internet Watch Foundation [ http://www.internetwatch.org.uk/ ], are a charity part-financed by the EU and apparently have contacts within the UK Government.

So what next? Today a fairly innocent picture of a teenager (OK maybe a bit young and slightly iffy), but tomorrow censorship of any image or news article or blog the Government might deem contrary to public policy?

Exactly ... OR ban any image that is not sourced by .. say Google.

Hopefully this will not hapen.

[VectraMan]

Almost. It was Blind Faith (Claptons new "Supergroup" after Cream). The cover caused controversy at the time, but it's still available and you can view it at Amazon.

Wasn't it rumoured to be Clapton's Mum?

I certainly never thought she was underage anyway, just skinny.

What about Led Zep's Houses of the Holy?