Age limit

[anna]

This is a global minimum age, it does not matter if your local law say 18 year or anything else less than 21. The minimum age still remains 21 years unless your local law require an even higher age limit. Think about it for a while, where is the Boundanna.net servers located? Do you know what country this page is served from and do you know the law of that country? You probably do not know and even if you know you must be prepared that the location of the servers and the operation of the website can move to a different country at any time.

What is legal where you live might not be legal where Boundanna.net is hosted or where Boundanna.net is operated from. Internet is international and there are quite a number of international issues associated with it. It is possible and even very easy to break many laws by pushing down keys on a keyboard or clicking on a mouse.

The age limit set on this forum is to safeguard its users and administrators against such legal issues. Now or in the future.

The adult internet industry must police itself and not only make sure to follow the laws but actually do much better. Otherwise we will be closed down by new even harder laws and that would be the end of this forum and others like it.

[Kronopticon]

duly noted..... :(

[bound_jenny]

On this I completely agree. The world is much, much bigger than the little bubble one sits in when at the computer. Yes, the Internet makes the world smaller, but it also shows how much it is diverse in customs, culture and laws. The Internet makes the world more complicated.

The adult internet industry must police itself and not only make sure to follow the laws but actually do much better. Otherwise we will be closed down by new even harder laws and that would be the end of this forum and others like it.

That's also very pertinent. We have to make sure that we uphold the highest standards, even if we are a bunch of pervs and kinksters. If we can't maintain our own self-discipline, apply our own rules, someone will do it for us, but in a much more restrictive fashion. A lot of laws are there because people abuse the system, i.e. they think "oh, it's not so bad", even if it is illegal, either for them or someone else. No, it is not "not so bad". There has to be just one complaint and this board could be forced to shut down. Then some politician seeking more votes will start pounding the podium and demanding stricter laws against "sexual violence", distorting the facts just to get people on side, using the old "protect the children" theme (no, I don't condone exposing kids to this, I think that's obvious enough even to the most obnoxiously argumentative reader). Then even more people will suffer just because one person or a handful of people think they know better and thus are above the law. Yes, this is an extreme scenario, but it could happen.

All that could be avoided if we take it upon ourselves to keep order, and to apply the rules. There is no shame in following rules. In fact, I take pride in following rules, because I appreciate what I have and I don't want it taken away from me because I don't (or someone else doesn't) want to "be told what to do". Rules are the basis of civilized society, and we are just as civilized as the rest of the world. Just kinkier.

Jenny.

[LoKiT]

I think the US is looking to control the internet via this bill... The COICA Internet Censorship and Copyright Bill. Check out http://www.eff.org/coica. From what I can make out this works by a Whitelist and Blacklist system. If the site doesn't comply you hit the blacklist and all DNS requests for the site fail, effectively blocked. For those of us that understand the 30yr old bugs in DNS understand what a dumb idea this is.

This bill is being being pushed through right now. This is almost as most stupid idea second to the 'A Federal crypto back door' law. Okay they say it intends to use this to block p2p and share sites, but we are sadly moving to towards state control and idea will proliferate globally. Its doomed to fail as the bad guys will simply just pop up on new domain names and thus whitelist by default. But I can see this becoming the tool of choice to control internet content and I fear it will be based by subject material and not content control :(

[kosvince]

Totally agree. Younger viewers must be protected from content that may shock them. And protection begins with restriction.......which is already bondage isn't it ? ;-) what a paradox lol