First up, Paheal is probably the biggest and most well known site when it comes to fictional porn. I'm sure that the head honchos knew/realized it would come to this eventually when it started up. Plus I recalls the servers to the site are located in the UK, so IMO this is probably a safeguard, if anything.

Second, as most folks here know, /pco/ and /coq/ have rules mandating that loli/shota be spoiler tagged, and I don't think there's been a problem [aside from apparently problems in /coq/, but I don't go there]. Plus there's the huge shade of gray when it comes to qualification [the mandatory spoiler tag is for images that approach Lilo's place on that spectrum] (Speaking of which, does anybody happen to have that chart Anonex edited and posted on /pco/ at the time. I don't)

So no, a "purge" of sorts really isn't necessary, just a [re]establishment of standards [and common sense] which will hopefully keep Anonex out of the reach of ol' Long Arm for some time

Note: As pointed out on the site, they're only getting rid of toddlercon and what not right now. So obviously they won't get rid of the loli and shota until there's a clear definition of what to get rid of, lest they remove a huge chunk of their inventory

i visit rule 34 offten. as well as outher sites. some have servers in the neatherlands to avoide any bull shit people can try. and from what iv heard its working out for them. and as for the law and people trying to ban toddlercon. what their trying to do is fight the 1st amenment. and the problum they say is that they cant tell the diffrence between real child porn and fake. but to me it wont pass and if it dose what will they do? arest every one with a computer or every one with a pen and papper?

I personally think loli/shota characters and art should probably be struck from /pco/. If I'm not mistaken, some dude was just given -20 years- in jail for possession of that crap.

Obscene things are not protected under the first amendment, and thanks to the Protect Act of 2003, fictional characters are given the same status as real people when it comes to depictions of CP. And what qualifies as an obscene thing is determined by the Miller Test of Obscenity.
A.) Is anything sexual happening in the picture?
B.) Applying contemporary community standards, would the subject of the illustrations depict something your local jury of over the hill pensioners find unacceptable?
C.) Does the piece lack artistic, political, or educational value, as determined by people capable of putting you away for life?

I have no opinion on the subject when it's illustrated. But good grief, two decades for -that-.

>>1462

I see it becoming a crime that will only ever be prosecuted if they want the guy for something and need a reason to arrest them.

It's still bullshit but as long people are smart about it, it shouldn't be that big a problem

This law is fucking pathetic. The funny thing is, most child molesters either don't own CP at all or only own the real thing, not drawn CP - that's for basement dwellers who would have a heart attack before touching a kid.

So far the only people theyve grabbed I think in the US and Canada are guys who ordered loli/toddlercon shit from japan, and it got caught up at customs.

Well it depends on if our servers are in UK or Australia

When has there been explicit loli-shota on this website?

>>1594
Ever browse /pco/?
Congratulations. Should your hard drive ever be given one of them there FBI lookyloos and they recover some of those pictures from your data, you're probably gonna be charged with felony obscenity and/or charged with possession of CP.

I've read conflicting interpretations. Before I guess they kind of shrugged about drawn stuff, but now apparently they include illustrations of all kinds since they learned weirdos were drawing life-drawings in order to "wash it."

While the idea of anybody being thrown in jail and deemed a felon for masturbating to drawings of anything makes me sick, maybe it'd be a good idea to err on the side of caution.

>>1593
In addition, when it wasn't due to customs it was usually in correlation with an actual child obscenity charge, or they did something else actually pedophilic (i.e. hide in a tree in a park and breathe heavily or some shit).

I don't know that the gov't can charge you outright on drawn images, but there are some in Congress trying damn hard to make sure they can. For now it's usually incidental.