# Can text-only be legally obscene?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [May 20, 2008, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016 "2008-05-20T20:16:38Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 3

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\
**Post date:** [May 22, 2008, 12:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016/41 "2008-05-22T12:58:17Z")

</div>

[QUOTE=eldowan]  
I think the third point from Bricker is really too ambiguous.

Who gets to decide if a sex/torture story has no artistic or literary value?  
Value to whom? I don’t condone, but if someone was to read and then apply those details in real life, wouldn’t the text be of value to the person acting them out?  
[/QUOTE]

It isn’t “from Bricker,” it is from legal precedent in the United States.

That’s the test courts use. It’s a very bad one IMHO, but there you have it. Who decides? The court.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016.md?page=2)