Opinions on onlyfans and adult entertainment industry

TheValeyard wrote: »

If it is an Onlyfans leak, then it's a copyright issue if someone has shared paid content without permission?

This is what was claimed by this advocate earlier it's the same as streaming of premier League matches online ,
It will be used to guarantee revenue streams for an foreign based porn streaming service .

Gatling wrote: »

This is what was claimed by this advocate earlier it's the same as streaming of premier League matches online ,
It will be used to guarantee revenue streams for an foreign based porn streaming service .

But sure, hasnt there been copyright issues with porn since the modern internet began? I've no idea how this would be in any way enforceable. They've enough difficulty trying to deal with child images. Not saying these women dont have a legitimate gripe here, but I'd assume it's one of those risks you take if you go into the adult business.

TheValeyard wrote: »

They've enough difficulty trying to deal with child images. Not saying these women dont have a legitimate gripe here, but I'd assume it's one of those risks you take if you go into the adult business.

And rather than educating them about what can happen they are now encouraging girls to join and set up their own porn streams because they will have protection for when someone shares an image or video they actually paid for

Isn't there at at best some inconsistency (and at worst hypocrisy) here, I think it's fair to say that over the last while there has been ore of an attempt to destigmatise/legitmamse sex workers, and to have the industry treated like any other one.
I may be way off, but this seems a bit like an attempt to give them "special treatment", in that there needs to be something other than copyright/piracy protections because sex is involved.

Invidious wrote: »

It's hardly treated like any other job, though, is it?

So, ladies, what do you do for a living?

Woman A: I'm a nurse.

Woman B: I'm a teacher.

Woman C: I take pictures of my boobs and post them on the Internet.

Woman C- I make more in a month then the other two combined do in a year and no I don't pay tax

Gatling wrote: »

Woman C- I make more in a month then the other two combined do in a year and no I don't pay tax

But then, I also share more than just photos of me topless...

I dont actually know what goes on, or what lads would be paying, but I'd presume youd want to be doing live shows with props to make some decent money

Gatling wrote: »

I believe she made up the claim .

is she finished hassling the rugby players who were found not guilty

Invidious wrote: »

It's hardly treated like any other job, though, is it?

So, ladies, what do you do for a living?

Woman A: I'm a nurse.

Woman B: I'm a teacher.

Woman C: I take pictures of my boobs and post them on the Internet.

It's not really a long term career though, this is probably as good as its going to get.
Kinda reminds me of when Uber started and there was all the fantastic commotion about making money in your free time.

Sure the barrier for entry is so low that any woman (or man) with a half decent phone and internet connection can set up an account and take a slice of the pie.
There's only so many idiots spending money on porn, and once you're not flavour of the month, you start getting competition, and lads start getting bored of the same pair of tits, revenues will drop and you're quickly into debt when OnlyFans can't sustain the lifestyle you're accustomed to.

Good luck getting a regular job when you have to explain that hole in your CV and a potential employer googles your name.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

What specific NZ criminal offence(s) are you referring to?



Violent backlash? Why would you think his parents are violent? And if they are, why would this suddenly become the responsibility of the person making the report?

The lengths people are going to in order to distract attention from the original problem are quite extreme here.

You do realize that when one reports a crime, they don't actually specify what they expect the alleged suspect to be charged with?
Rather they present the harm they suffered and the police investigate, then presents a file of the evidence to a state solicitor/DPP for recommendation as to what charges should be lain?

It isn't within the remit of the Victims Alliance to decide how to prosecute either here or in NZ.

Now as to what crime the alleged 16yo suspect could be charged with?
Luckily for the Irish "victims", NZ has quite a progressive criminal system and the legislation against revenge porn and intimate private photo sharing is both effective and indeed could we'll be a model for our own.
Take a look at the Harmful Digital Communications Act and take your pic.

But again the point here is, the cache of images claimed by Linda, by whomever your own trusted source is?
Doesn't exist.

Further to that, the Victims Alliance rather than report the alleged crime to the relevant authority.
Chose to out a 16yo boy to his parents for alleged sexual image abuse.
It's not a great leap to expect a physical punishment to the boy to ensue.
I note you mention why should that be the concern of those making the report? Along with why would one assume the boys parents are violent?
Why would anyone associated with victim support assume they weren't or that violence couldn't be triggered by their report?
Strange logic there, don't you think?
The boy can be beaten but sure how was anyone from the victims alliance to expect that may be a possibility?
Not like they'd have experience on triggers to violence or anything is it?

You keep dipping in to the thread and honestly white knighting without actually giving any rationale or reasoning for your positions.
It's a bit pathetic at this point.
The actions undertaken by Linda and co, to protect the copyright of sexworkers by doxxing a child rather than actually reporting the purported harm suffered by her clients is a far more dangerous and reckless act.
Was it decided that no crime had actually occured and the kid still had to be made pay?
What legal advice framed her potentially harmful actions?
How was the decision to doxx the kid, arrived at in the context of victim support?

We are over a week into this "scandal" and still no meat to the original claims and of particular note should be the shift made away from the claims of thousands of women leaked, to more concrete and emotive examples of sexual image abuse.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

What if the NZ police are violent and dish out physical punishment? Why would you assume that they're not violent?

That's how it works, right?

So no actual response to the points raised?
Throw in a bit of moronic reductio and duck out again?

Perhaps take the questions raised in my post to your source and ask her what your input should be

There has to be some kind of personal responsibility to take into account, don't be sending naked photos of yourself to people in the first place because you've no idea what someones intentions are. If they are taken without your knowledge then there should be some form of legal repercussions.

kippy wrote: »

This is it exactly, a civil offence and not a criminal one.
I have no idea why they are wanting to merge this type of thing in with the creation and dissemination of child porn and other offences.

aside from the push to normalise sex work - a point on which I agree.


We all know if it was only a porn leak that people wouldn't give a damn. Like, in all seriousness selling your tits and ass isn't intimate. It's porn for sale for money. They got fleeced online and it wasn't an invasion of their privacy at all.

By linking it to the average girl on the street sending her bf pics (which is an intimate thing and a huge invasion of privacy and completely wrong) and to child porn (which is the worst thing) they are including in their campaign (for want of a better term) "legitimate victims" that people will actually care about.

This legitimises the porn aspect which on it's own wouldn't stand a chance.

It's what these campaigners do - they sell the hard or sympathetic cases to push through a variety of changes that have nothing much to do with the sympathetic cases.

Nash Hissing Handshake wrote: »

People forgot the cervical cancer saga did they with tony or he likes to think of himself as the ‘Father of the nation ‘

I don't think it's forgotten TBH - it's very much still in the news......
The narrative that people are making here is nonsense - Does he like to think of himself as the "Father of the nation"??