illegal digital images

I liked the first to add their replies to the blog section. Indeed true, someone will always find offense in something. And finding the bible offensive is not unheard of. What will this come to?
 
My three-year-old daughter and I were browsing YouTube, looking for clips of cute animals. I clicked on a link that came up entitled "Cute Puppy Says 'I Love You'". The first 20 seconds were standard YouTube-looking footage of a guy trying to coax his puppy to say "I wuv you"...at which point the puppy's head turned into a terrifying CG representation of the leering head of Satan, filling the screen, with a blaring death-metal soundtrack.

I lunged to shut the video down; it took a few seconds, by which time my daughter was completely traumatized.

I am a strong supporter of our freedom to create images, of any type. But I've never wanted to shut someone down as much as at that moment.
 
retnull said:
My three-year-old daughter and I were browsing YouTube, looking for clips of cute animals. I clicked on a link that came up entitled "Cute Puppy Says 'I Love You'". The first 20 seconds were standard YouTube-looking footage of a guy trying to coax his puppy to say "I wuv you"...at which point the puppy's head turned into a terrifying CG representation of the leering head of Satan, filling the screen, with a blaring death-metal soundtrack.
Click to expand...

Lol, what can I say?
  • Clicking on a link saying "Cute Puppy Says 'I Love You'" is looking for troubles :D
  • Death metal is not that bad, I think I'd rather have that than the brainless techno/dance music my kids like listening to...
 
Your three year old daughter will be scared or offended by many topics and forms of expression well within the bounds of everyday public discourse and the First Amendment. The responsible approach is to limit her exposure to such information, rather than imply that free speech ought to conform to the sensitivities of a three year old.

The same way you wouldn't take your daughter to some friendly named show without first checking reviews for age appropriate content, you should perhaps consider compiling the videos first and only then showing them to your daughter.

The Tennnessee statute is cheap political pandering to narrowminded and ill defined decency notions. Perhaps the Supreme Court will, for the first time, strike it down as "presumptuous." :)
 
This one is too funny.

If I find a poster on a wall offensive, I can sue.
If I find a TV ad offensive, I can sue.
If I find a comment on a radio offensive, I can sue.
If I find some music offensive, I can sue.
If I find the smell of KFC chicken while walking beside the store offensive, I can sue.
.
.
.

There are countless things that are meant to be seen/smelled/heard to the general public. You can't satisfy everyone, and there is no standard on what's offensive and what is not. This will end up looking worse than communism.
 
Last edited:
This is ridiculous. I'm a CreateSpace outsourced designer. My job is to create book covers and interiors. Just yesterday, I was looking for an image of a woman's silhouette coming through a doorway. I searched on iStock for "woman silhouette doorway" and among the many images of a woman's silhouette in a doorway, were images of women half-nude in lingerie with handguns, whips, chains, etc. Is iStock going to be punished because someone searches for a woman with a gun and sees some brief, near-nudity?

This won't stand. At least not after the courts get hit with many thousands of lawsuits.

Actually, I'm going to look at the gallery now. First image I see that offends me, is going to the police. I won't stand for this constant barrage of artfully presented nude models!!
 
My word...not to be rude to anyone in the USA, but seriously, does politicians not have better things to do that this hogwash?

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin
 
Huh

I guess Tennesee was feeling left out and in need of attention in the news. Even the most hardcore zealots will picket this one. The 1st amendment is first afterall.
 
Sorry, but I can't resist:

think_of_the_children.jpg


Hope this doesn't offend anyone in Tennessee.
 
I'm a bit worried that some of these comments may encourage innocent people to go googling with some of these phrases to see what the fuss is about. Suggestion for those who've managed to avoid some darker parts of the internet - you can't unsee what you'll find there. You might not want to explore too much.
 
Glass Addict said:
This one is too funny.

If I find a poster on a wall offensive, I can sue.
If I find a TV ad offensive, I can sue.
If I find a comment on a radio offensive, I can sue.
If I find some music offensive, I can sue.
If I find the smell of KFC chicken while walking beside the store offensive, I can sue.
Click to expand...

You can always sue. All you need is a lawyer.
 
Wait, I have a right to not be offended?:rolleyes:
Pretty sure that isn't true anywhere real...
But I'm not surprised; when you teach a generation (or two) what to think instead of how to think and elevate "self esteem" over accomplishment this kind of silliness is the result.

We are so screwed and we did it to ourselves.

Rob
 
retnull said:
My three-year-old daughter and I were browsing YouTube, looking for clips of cute animals. I clicked on a link that came up entitled "Cute Puppy Says 'I Love You'". The first 20 seconds were standard YouTube-looking footage of a guy trying to coax his puppy to say "I wuv you"...at which point the puppy's head turned into a terrifying CG representation of the leering head of Satan, filling the screen, with a blaring death-metal soundtrack.
Click to expand...

You have to be really careful on YouTube. We've done the same thing looking for cute animal videos. The list of "recommended" videos on each page has to be carefully scrutinized. Most are not for young children. Things like "cute" monkeys massacring each other or Elmo doing something illicit. The kids rarely watch videos or TV, but every now and then you need a distraction.

But photography has always had uncomfortable pictures. If we do not challenge ourselves or question ourselves or expose ourselves to various realities then we are not being honest with ourselves.

I am offended by pictures of cute kittens. Ban them all! :p
 
The very first time this goes to court the whole law will be thrown out...
Do Lawmakers really think this was worth doing...???
People who claim that the Bible offends them, offends me...who wins...???
 
Each case has to be decided on its own merits, but anything remotely (or perhaps not)frivolous will be attacked with the defense that the statute is too broad to be upheld.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top