YouTube singer faces 20 years for adding explicit lyrics to video

OutlawPete

This is unbelievable.

This YouTube singer guy edited a video he had where he was singing to school kids, to look as if the lyrics were explicit. Parent complained and so the guy got charged with producing Child Pornography and now faces a possible 20 years.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blFBPiNZDgI

Christ the is a gap between technology and the law that needs to be addressed.

Does he really deserve jailtime for this?

krudler

thats ludicrous, a redubbed video is the same as child porn now?

Yakult

I cant really tell unless I saw the original video. But from what I've seen so far this has gone way ott. Was it meant to be funny or wha?

MrStuffins

OutlawPete wrote: »

Does he really deserve jailtime for this?

Of course.

String him up, chemically castrate him! He's likely to offend again! He needs to register as a sex offender!

Everyone knows that his not actually singing the song to the kids isn't the point! The point is that, by editing a video, he is the same as paedophiles everywhere!

BURN HIM!!!!

Le King

Another backward town in Michigan.

major bill

Its america what do you expect?!!!

Yakult

MrStuffins wrote: »

Of course.

String him up, chemically castrate him! He's likely to offend again! He needs to register as a sex offender!

Everyone knows that his not actually singing the song to the kids isn't the point! The point is that, by editing a video, he is the same as paedophiles everywhere!

ba-dum tishBURN HIM!!!!

Fyp.

Star Bingo

explicit lyrics? if the music itself is appealing to children, then i'd be suspicious

s3129

Is the video anywhere?

Jesus Wept

People have been put on the sex offender register and charged with having cartoon pictures of the simpsons (bart, lisa, etc) having sex.

Gunsfortoys

I hope Bieber is next.

MrStuffins

So, if someone makes a porno, te girl is Over18 and it is explicitly advertised as such, but the girl in the video PLAYS a character under 18, that's illegal right?

What if it's a Hollywood movie? If Steven Speilberg made a movie about Clerical Abuse, would he be facing 20 years?

Blatter

Thousands of peadophiles walking the streets and they want to bang this harmless idiot up for 20 years.

If it wasn't so serious it would be funny.

OutlawPete

s3129 wrote: »

Is the video anywhere?

Can't find it, but not surprised after this.

Here's a another news report ..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gweZ5GBmBjk

Dublin_Gunner

Gunsfortoys wrote: »

I hope Bieber is next.

He could have substituted Bieber for the kids, and got the same charge TBH.

MrStuffins

SOCCER4LIFE wrote: »

Thousands of peadophiles walking the streets and they want to bang this harmless idiot up for 20 years.

If it wasn't so serious it would be funny.

Ah, but the Paedos are smart enough not to sing explicit lyrics to children and post it on the Internet.

They draw the line at posting and sharing videos and pics of them actually abusing the children, they're not stupid!

Star Bingo

The-Rigger wrote: »

People have been put on the sex offender register and charged with having cartoon pictures of the simpsons (bart, lisa, etc) having sex.

not forgetting this little gem of a federal offense

DOC09UNAM

Mega Retarded..

major bill

MrStuffins wrote: »

So, if someone makes a porno, te girl is Over18 and it is explicitly advertised as such, but the girl in the video PLAYS a character under 18, that's illegal right?

What if it's a Hollywood movie? If Steven Speilberg made a movie about Clerical Abuse, would he be facing 20 years?

it actually is illegal afaik. A director in america known as Max hardcore was giving jail time for it.

but he deserved it a truly warped person.

MrStuffins

Star Bingo wrote: »

not forgetting this little gem of a federal offense

Post reported

to the FBI

MrStuffins

major bill wrote: »

it actually is illegal afaik. A director in america known as Max hardcore was given jail time for it.

Oh no, I was saying it was illegal. I remember hearing a story where a Porn Actress had to fly into some toen and appear in court to show she was in fact over 18!

But what if someone like Speilberg made a movie about Clerical Abuse. Would he be arrested for portraying adults having sex with children?

major bill

MrStuffins wrote: »

Oh no, I was saying it was illegal. I remember hearing a story where a Porn Actress had to fly into some toen and appear in court to show she was in fact over 18!

But what if someone like Speilberg made a movie about Clerical Abuse. Would he be arrested for portraying adults having sex with children?

oh right my bad...well the film lolita with jeremy irons had a sex scene where the girl was only 12/13/14 im not sure what age but under 18 anyway

Dublin_Gunner

MrStuffins wrote: »

Oh no, I was saying it was illegal. I remember hearing a story where a Porn Actress had to fly into some toen and appear in court to show she was in fact over 18!

But what if someone like Speilberg made a movie about Clerical Abuse. Would he be arrested for portraying adults having sex with children?

Spielberg would never make that.


Unless it involved aliens. And maybe an unlikely hero.

we'llallhavetea_old

i wanna know what he said in the song. unless he said something promoting paedophilia then i can't see what the fuss is about

whingers, fcuking EVERYWHERE!

MrStuffins

we'llallhavetea wrote: »

whingers, fcuking EVERYWHERE!

Are any of these whingers under 18? Because if they are, and they're f*cking everywhere, you're going to jail my friend!

major bill

we'llallhavetea wrote: »

i wanna know what he said in the song. unless he said something promoting paedophilia then i can't see what the fuss is about

whingers, fcuking EVERYWHERE!

id like to hear the lyrics aswell there has to be method behind the madness.

OutlawPete

Will Ferrell I remember getting stick also for editing a video with his daughter to make it look as if he was cursing at her.

How about a movie where they kill a kid, like in a horror, isn't that pretend murder - is 'pretend murder' not as bad as 'pretend singing of explicit songs'?

Hhmmm.

Chuck Stone

They're making an example of that poor chimp for being a chimp.

diddlybit

How the hell does this consitute as child pornography? That's the worst interpretation of the law I've seen in a while. The kids were not harmed and if anyone found it a turn on, (becuse they were all fully clothed), they may be harboring a paraphilia of some kind.

Poor guy, it was a genius idea.

Jesus Wept

diddlybit wrote: »

harboring a paraphilia of some kind.

Poor guy, it was a genius idea.

Words fail me.

OutlawPete

MrStuffins wrote: »

I remember hearing a story where a Porn Actress had to fly into some toen and appear in court to show she was in fact over 18!

I believe the Outlaw Pete Enquirer ran that story also:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055951118

pragmatic1

MrStuffins wrote: »

Oh no, I was saying it was illegal. I remember hearing a story where a Porn Actress had to fly into some toen and appear in court to show she was in fact over 18!

But what if someone like Speilberg made a movie about Clerical Abuse. Would he be arrested for portraying adults having sex with children?

Its not illegal.

yammycat

“See how long it takes to make your panties mine”
(wide shot of the children)
“I’ll add some foreplay in just to make it fun”
(close up of girl laughing)
“I want you to suck on my testes until I spurt in your face”
(close up of girl covering her mouth)
“I’ll lick on your chewie”
(close up of two girls covering their mouths)
“I want to stick my index finger in your anis”
(close up of boy making a shocked face)
“I’ll be the bus riding your ass up and down my town”
(close up of boy with grossed-out look on his face)
“I’m gonna use my sausage to make fettucine, then for dessert have a Harry Houdini”
(close up of girl laughing and rocking)

etc etc

im invisible

we'llallhavetea wrote: »

i wanna know what he said in the song. unless he said something promoting paedophilia then i can't see what the fuss is about

Hilary Duff is not quite old enough so
I ain't never seen a butt like that
Maybe next year I'll say ass and she'll make my pee pee go
D-Doi'ng, doi'ng, doi'ng



*damn, just too late.

Console

OutlawPete wrote: »

This is unbelievable.

This YouTube singer guy edited a video he had where he was singing to school kids, to look as if the lyrics were explicit. Parent complained and so the guy got charged with producing Child Pornography and now faces a possible 20 years.

.......


Christ the is a gap between technology and the law that needs to be addressed.

Does he really deserve jailtime for this?

This world is too fu*king pc :mad:
Cant make a joke no more without someone being offended. Oh did you hear about the jewish guy walking into a bar? ... oh wait i cant say that. :rolleyes:

Jesus Wept

it's political correctness gone mAd Stu.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGAOCVwLrXo

Seloth

This trial reminds me of Sharia law in extreme muslim countries,or that of laws in facist states.

Even so more it is not the law itself but the reaction of the people.


Hoping to prosecute a 21 year old giving him 20 years jail for a little prank!A fine is the most that should happen!He shouldnt even have to serve a day,let alone 20 years!

Raze_them_all

Jaysus ya gotta love the yanks

Millicent

What the fuck? I've known people who were actually molested for years getting less legal justice than this and this case is a fucking insult to all those who have ever really been a victim of paedophilia.

I watched that news link and it says "the kids will be affected by this". How?! They're kids. They don't what the hell is going on. They'd have to watch the video to be in any way affected and have it explained to them so if that happens, it's their dumbassed parents' fault.

I admit it was stupid to use the kids' images through deception like that but to ruin a young guy's life over that? I'm in no doubt that he's not the sick one in this case. :mad:

Naikon

It's stuff like this that reaffirms my general disgust towards humanity.

Feeona

yammycat wrote: »

“See how long it takes to make your panties mine”
(wide shot of the children)
“I’ll add some foreplay in just to make it fun”
(close up of girl laughing)
“I want you to suck on my testes until I spurt in your face”
(close up of girl covering her mouth)
“I’ll lick on your chewie”
(close up of two girls covering their mouths)
“I want to stick my index finger in your anis”
(close up of boy making a shocked face)
“I’ll be the bus riding your ass up and down my town”
(close up of boy with grossed-out look on his face)
“I’m gonna use my sausage to make fettucine, then for dessert have a Harry Houdini”
(close up of girl laughing and rocking)

etc etc

He's a tool for posting that in the first place. Twenty years is harsh, but what the hell was he thinking?

That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.. And in Ireland, I'm pretty that if you get a pencil and paper and draw something, you can go to jail for possessing child pornography.

dougal-maguire

Deleted User wrote: »

That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.. And in Ireland, I'm pretty that if you get a pencil and paper and draw something, you can go to jail for possessing child pornography.

we're totally backward,you can go to jail for having sex with an adult that's dressed as a school girl AFAIK.

wild_cat

dougal-maguire wrote: »

we're totally backward,you can go to jail for having sex with an adult that's dressed as a school girl AFAIK.

Seriously?

Actually nothing would shock me any more in relation to our laws.

Pacing Mule

Millicent wrote: »

What the fuck? I've known people who were actually molested for years getting less legal justice than this and this case is a fucking insult to all those who have ever really been a victim of paedophilia.

I watched that news link and it says "the kids will be affected by this". How?! They're kids. They don't what the hell is going on. They'd have to watch the video to be in any way affected and have it explained to them so if that happens, it's their dumbassed parents' fault.

I admit it was stupid to use the kids' images through deception like that but to ruin a young guy's life over that? I'm in no doubt that he's not the sick one in this case. :mad:

+1

I was / am a victim of child sexual abuse - carried out by a man who has abused at least 15 children that I am aware of. Despite 4 of us making a seperate complaint and full statements to the Gardai the DPP decided there was not enough evidence to prosecute. That's Ireland for you.

It's laughable to read the OP in this case. Personally especially with my background I don't see the humour in the song at all but that said it is exactly that - a song with an edited video. No children were harmed. Jail is ridiculous.

Yep... And online aswell, if they're over 18 but portrayed as being younger, it's child pornography.

dougal-maguire

wild_cat wrote: »

Seriously?

I think i read it somewhere on hear,maybe someone who knows can clear this up?

^^^^ looks like i wasnt just making it up :cool:

wild_cat

dougal-maguire wrote: »

I think i read it somewhere on hear,maybe someone who knows can clear this up?

^^^^ looks like i wasnt just making it up :cool:

Meh, it doesn't affect me anyway. I think if my other half was to dress up as a school boy i'd mammy him not get off on it.

wild_cat

Deleted User wrote: »

Yep... And online aswell, if they're over 18 but portrayed as being younger, it's child pornography.

I can see how that one would work alright.

seamus

Feeona wrote: »

He's a tool for posting that in the first place. Twenty years is harsh, but what the hell was he thinking?

There's a fine line between all-out shock humour and serious content. The problem is that courts do not have a sense of humour.

In this country too (presumably it's similar in the US) child porn offences aren't limited to images or video. Written or spoken content (no doubt including songs) which depicts sexual acts involving children are similarly illegal and can land you in big trouble.

The whole thing is quite poorly thought-out because it allows no room for legitimate use of the same, e.g. farcical, humourous or critical circumstances.

There was a thread on the legal forum a good while back relating to an abuse victim who wrote a book about his abuse where he went into fairly explicit detail of the abuse. It was pointed out that the law is so ridiculous that the author could be convicted as a sex offender if someone was so anal or otherwise inclined to apply the letter of Irish law.

Reg'stoy

It's always funny when we don't know the people involved. But the guy was a tool who and I stand to be corrected, posted a video which if the earlier transcript is correct is pretty sick.

If he had posted this video and it was of my nieces, nephews or any of my friends children I'd track him down and kick the living sh*t out of him. The parents of the kids concerned are rightly looking to get some payback, granted 20 years is America over the top.

I personally would get all the fathers, uncles and grandfathers and this tool into a room and have him explain to them how this is funny. Just because someone produces something under the banner of humour or 'freedom of speech' doesn't make it a legitimate form of expression.