One famous porn producer/actor had girls “confess” to being various ages, as young as 12, when they were actually 18+. They did arrest him for one, but they dismissed the charges.
So, just because they say they are 17, doesnt mean they are.
Mea culpa. I did read your post too quickly. Snark deserved.
As others said - the customers probably police the site fairly well. Nobody wants to be found with multiple illegal videos on their browser cache or history.
Assuming we’re talking about apparently questionable age - I guess the real question is “why?”
If it’s commercial, then they have to provide a link to their own website and the video for sale - I hope nobody in the business is that stupid, but you never know…
If the girl is lying about her age - then the guy doing the upload is simply about to get in a LOT of trouble, like Traci Lords’ associates.
If it’s amateur, then what -exhibitionist/boasting? Revenge? Trying to show how smart they are by covering their internet tracks? Presumably the site(s) keep logs of which IP sourced the videos, plus other details. There has to be a certain level of crazy reckless involved. I have to imagine anyone seriously posting this sort of material is actually doing it to somehow make money.
I gather there are some girls who look much younger; IIRC this was a plot point in a Law&Order SVU episode. However some discussion I saw once said the laws also cover “apparently under 18” and also prohibits even falsely claiming participants are under 18… which makes me wonder how a movie like “Blue is the Warmest Color” gets away with explicit sex scenes followed by a scene of the girl celebrating her 18th birthday. I assume the detail is whether the situation is obvious fiction or whether the purveyors apparently claim the participant is actually under 18.
Also, I recall there is a recent case about revenge porn, where the owners of the site were trying to charge a “fee” to have the material removed. Apparently that earned them an extortion or blackmail charge or something.
There are some movies that feature like mother/daughter or whatever and sometimes the video starts with the introductions (like they forgot to remove it or something). During these introductions the performers are holding up their driver’s licenses and making explicit statements that they are not, in fact, mother in daughter.
Uh…a friend told me.
Cite, please.
Thanks.
*Based on Max Extreme 4, the city of Los Angeles in 1998 charged him with child pornography and distribution of obscenity. The fact that the actress was over the age of 18 was not disputed; they brought charges based solely on the fact that the actress was portraying a character who was underage. Just before the case was brought to trial in 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled (in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition) that the statute prohibiting adults from portraying children in films and books was unconstitutional. Based on this ruling, the child pornography charges against Little were dismissed. *
Thanks.
Sure, there are such previews as you speak. But those are usually really obvious, with them actually saying “See More at ______” at various intervals, and obvious cutting. They’ll end as you describe, and the username will be somewhat related to the company. They’re also usually quite short, to make sure you can’t use the preview for the purposes of the full video.
The ones I’m seeing give you generic porn site names just scrolling along the top cheaply by someone who can’t edit (despite clear editting competence in the video and intro itself), and some even mention “If you find this anywhere else…” language. There’s often not enough info. And you definitely get a long enough video that shows everything important. If they’re ads, they’re really bad ones.
Still, those aren’t the only copyvios. There are the ones not obviously from DVD or VHS transfers, or copied from websites I myself know of–some of the nonnudes even will be people I knew from YouTube, who I know did not approve. The transfers will even often include the copying warning. And I can’t tell you how many cut off the audio entirely since they were obviously captured by screen recording software. They’ll even sometimes mention the particular software.
And, again, there’s no real way to report any of it, as far as I can tell. Not unless you go to the feedback button for the entire site and give them a link and reason. Nothing like what you’d expect if they depended on self-policing to filter out stuff.
In fact, I’m wondering how Ambivalid reported anything. Did you contact them by some .other means? I mean, it’s possible my adblocker blocks the report button or something.
the thing is, those would be copied from material where the copyright could be enforced, meaning the copyright holders (hesitate to call them “artists”) are reasonably sure their material is legal; which thus implies the people gratuitously sharing are also reasonably sure the material is legal. they just want to share the same stuff that gets them excited, I presume…
So to get back to the PO - illegal material may be copyright, but who’s going to try to enforce their claim? Also, I doubt anyone is foolish enough to copy someone else’s material and post it on a much more public site than no doubt they found it, when the only benefit is to draw legal attention to themselves. But, I think it was PT Barnum who said, “Nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public.” …nor their intelligence.
If you click on a video and go down right below the username of the person who posted the video, you’ll see a little “v”-like arrow that is a drop down button. Click on that and you’ll find a Flag icon. That’s what you push to report a video. It gives you the option of simply reporting or reporting along with an explanation of why you are reporting.
I use those sites, and report anything that looks underage. I’ll confess that I don’t bookmark those videos, or even go back to confirm that they have been removed as the last thing I want is to be flagged as the sort of person who is deliberately looking for that content.