# FOSTA and FA



## FluffyShutterbug (Mar 18, 2018)

So, there's a pending bill in the U.S. legislature called the Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act or FOSTA. While the cause might sound noble, it ends up severely weakening Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which if weakened, makes the admins of any website legally responsible for stuff its users do. Which naturally means that anyone who runs a website is going to have to take precautionary measures if they don't want to be sued or thrown in the slammer. The bill has already passed the House of Representatives with sweeping bipartisan support, so chances are, it's going to pass the Senate as well and be signed into law. So, with Section 230 being weakened, albeit with the goal of turning up the heat on online prostitution and stuff, what will all of this mean for Fur Affinity? Will we be seeing any amendments to the terms of service or code of conduct?


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Mar 22, 2018)

UPDATE: The bill has just passed the senate and is going to be officially signed into law. Please, someone answer. Are there going to be changes to FA's terms of services or COC now?


----------



## fourur (Mar 23, 2018)

i still want to enjoy furry, may the mods save the server


----------



## Cawdabra (Mar 23, 2018)

Another reason to not host servers in the US.


----------



## Sergei Sóhomo (Mar 23, 2018)

Rest in RIP internet


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Mar 23, 2018)

Sergei Sóhomo said:


> Rest in RIP internet


Another nail in the coffin.... First Net Neutrality, and now this.


----------



## Dragoneer (Mar 24, 2018)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> So, there's a pending bill in the U.S. legislature called the Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act or FOSTA. While the cause might sound noble, it ends up severely weakening Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which if weakened, makes the admins of any website legally responsible for stuff its users do. Which naturally means that anyone who runs a website is going to have to take precautionary measures if they don't want to be sued or thrown in the slammer. The bill has already passed the House of Representatives with sweeping bipartisan support, so chances are, it's going to pass the Senate as well and be signed into law. So, with Section 230 being weakened, albeit with the goal of turning up the heat on online prostitution and stuff, what will all of this mean for Fur Affinity? Will we be seeing any amendments to the terms of service or code of conduct?


This bill affects any and all sites, but I don't see it posing any major impact on the site or our services. We don't really have any services in place for hooking up with people.


----------



## quoting_mungo (Mar 24, 2018)

Because of the bill's massive overreach Craigslist has already shut down their personals section and Reddit closed down multiple subreddits. That massive overreach is also why it most likely stands to be struck down as soon as one of the giants starts to feel the heat.

This tweet came across my timeline and explains it pretty well:

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/977293719408791552


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Mar 31, 2018)

Dragoneer said:


> This bill affects any and all sites, but I don't see it posing any major impact on the site or our services. We don't really have any services in place for hooking up with people.


Are you completely sure that things will be okay, @Dragoneer ? A friend just shared this article with me, and things have gotten really bad really fast. As a matter of fact, a furry personals site, Pounced, has shut down its site in the wake of FOSTA-SESTA being passed.
www.engadget.com: Congress just legalized sex censorship: What to know
I know that FA doesn't have anything that's obviously a hook-up service, but I'm deeply concerned that the new law will be interpreted in a very loose and indiscriminate manor.


----------



## Dragoneer (Apr 2, 2018)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> Are you completely sure that things will be okay, @Dragoneer ? A friend just shared this article with me, and things have gotten really bad really fast. As a matter of fact, a furry personals site, Pounced, has shut down its site in the wake of FOSTA-SESTA being passed.
> www.engadget.com: Congress just legalized sex censorship: What to know
> I know that FA doesn't have anything that's obviously a hook-up service, but I'm deeply concerned that the new law will be interpreted in a very loose and indiscriminate manor.


FOSTA has the potential to affect any site. In all honestly, nobody REALLY knows how it's going to effect and what.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 2, 2018)

Dragoneer said:


> FOSTA has the potential to affect any site. In all honestly, nobody REALLY knows how it's going to effect and what.


Well, in any case, I'd strongly advise that this situation be looked into further. I'm afraid that more than black and white quid-pro-quo's for sex will be targeted and labeled as "sex trafficking".


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 3, 2018)

Please, god, tell me that the fandom's online presence isn't doomed. I've heard that a furry dating site, Pounced.org, has been shut down because of this fucking bill.
motherboard.vice.com: Furry Dating Site Shuts Down Because of FOSTA


----------



## quoting_mungo (Apr 3, 2018)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> Please, god, tell me that the fandom's online presence isn't doomed. I've heard that a furry dating site, Pounced.org, has been shut down because of this fucking bill.
> motherboard.vice.com: Furry Dating Site Shuts Down Because of FOSTA


Shut down by the people running it, not the US government, mind. It's very much a "can we afford possibly being held criminally liable for people violating our terms?" issue. It's something every site has to consider for itself, and the nature of the site's legitimate use - dating sites lie closer to the prohibited activity by their nature, so the risk assessment for a personals site would automatically be more dire than that for a site like FA.


----------



## jmac32here (Apr 6, 2018)

The only concern I would have for a site like FA is it's Forums.  While they are not designed to facilitate furries hooking up to hang out and stuff, however users may still use the forums for exactly that purpose and in doing so would put the forums, and the site, at risk of legal action.

Esp. since as the bill is currently written, any site that "facilitates" in any way, shape, or form, is liable - regardless if the admins of the site are aware of it doing so.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Apr 6, 2018)

I honestly think FurAffinity will continue indefinitely until the owners get thrown in jail for running such a weird website. 

Not really though. i just see this bill being used as an excuse by the religious right to exact vengeance of us "immoral, godless liberals" or something.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 6, 2018)

> Redacted by staff





BahgDaddy said:


> I honestly think FurAffinity will continue indefinitely until the owners get thrown in jail for running such a weird website.


You two do realize that the bill passed with SWEEPING bipartisan support, right? I forget what the vote looked like in the house, but in the senate, NINETY-SEVEN out of 100 voted "Yes" to FOSTA-SESTA.


----------



## Open_Mind (Apr 6, 2018)

I share Fluffy's concern. It is entirely possible this could extend to Discord as well. It would not take a very wide stretch of the imagination to consider the roleplay activities as being a type of "hook up".


----------



## CindyPig (Apr 6, 2018)

Snarky remarks ? Conservatives act on logic? I'm all for rampant fantasy , but whatever drugs your'e using need to be ramped down a notch. I'm not a big fan of rapid fire bullet ejaculation fetish freaks.I want everybody to get along , but arguments are entreating provide nobody gets


> Redacted by staff


This is America , there is no moral high ground , just product placement for massive bullet ejaculation.


----------



## Open_Mind (Apr 6, 2018)

A lawyer, who happens to also be a furry, wrote an extensive explanation. For those with the patience for detail, see below.

www.lawyersandliquor.com: InkedFur.com’s Furry Friday: FOSTA Parents Suck – Pounced.org and the Sex Trafficking Shutdown


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 6, 2018)

Open_Mind said:


> I share Fluffy's concern. It is entirely possible this could extend to Discord as well. It would not take a very wide stretch of the imagination to consider the roleplay activities as being a type of "hook up".


This.... Is exactly what I'm afraid of. A puritanical lawyer wouldn't have a hard time ridding the internet of all NSFW content.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 6, 2018)

Do you all think that this could happen...?


----------



## Open_Mind (Apr 6, 2018)

So wouldn't this extend to sites like Tinder and Grinder, or even "clean" sites like eHarmony? This is going to affect millions.


----------



## Open_Mind (Apr 6, 2018)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> Do you all think that this could happen...?


Fluffy, I just don't know. There's a part of me that wants to believe, that there will be enough financial impact from something like this to cause some of the larger organizations to fight back. But the wording has been deviously written to make it almost impossible for anyone to fight this, without being labeled as a supporter of sex trafficking. This is legal Kryptonite. Nobody's going to want to touch it.


----------



## quoting_mungo (Apr 6, 2018)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> Do you all think that this could happen...?


As I said above, the law is wildly unconstitutional. Unfortunately that still means it has to hit the bottom line of someone with deep enough pockets to put lawyers to work on it. Craigslist doesn't want to risk getting shut down altogether, so it sacrificed personals until someone with deeper pockets gets the law struck down, specifically mentioning the possibility of bringing back personals in the future. FetLife tightened up rules regarding certain types of activities awaiting case law. Sites like Pounced, which neither have major financial backing nor non-personals functions to stick around for, are the ones most likely to end up killed by this.

Ultimately it's a shit piece of legislation, and sexworkers have been pretty vocal about that from the get-go. Problem is "sex trafficking" is a thought-terminating cliché. Voting against SESTA/FOSTA came with the risk of being labeled as pro-trafficking, which likely influenced some congressmen/senators' votes.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 6, 2018)

Open_Mind said:


> Fluffy, I just don't know. There's a part of me that wants to believe, that there will be enough financial impact from something like this to cause some of the larger organizations to fight back. But the wording has been deviously written to make it almost impossible for anyone to fight this, without being labeled as a supporter of sex trafficking. This is legal Kryptonite. Nobody's going to want to touch it.


Hmm... Although the same could've been said about the McCarthy era. Couldn't any of his opponents have been labeled as a supporter of communism?


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 6, 2018)

quoting_mungo said:


> As I said above, the law is wildly unconstitutional. Unfortunately that still means it has to hit the bottom line of someone with deep enough pockets to put lawyers to work on it. Craigslist doesn't want to risk getting shut down altogether, so it sacrificed personals until someone with deeper pockets gets the law struck down, specifically mentioning the possibility of bringing back personals in the future. FetLife tightened up rules regarding certain types of activities awaiting case law. Sites like Pounced, which neither have major financial backing nor non-personals functions to stick around for, are the ones most likely to end up killed by this.
> 
> Ultimately it's a shit piece of legislation, and sexworkers have been pretty vocal about that from the get-go. Problem is "sex trafficking" is a thought-terminating cliché. Voting against SESTA/FOSTA came with the risk of being labeled as pro-trafficking, which likely influenced some congressmen/senators' votes.


Sadly, this is also the reason why I didn't have the heart to write my congressmen....


----------



## BahgDaddy (Apr 6, 2018)

I get the feeling that everyone looked at the bill, saw "protect sexual assault victims and prevent sex trafficking!" and signed on the dotted line. 

Now, if prostitution is illegal, just don't do that. That seems easy enough. What's funny is D.C. is probably rife wit prostitution. 

However I disagree with the overall assertion that this will effect NSFW content. It will effect websites that let users freely upload content and speech, however. So it readily punishes free speech. Both the left and the right increasingly do not appear to understand the importantanc of free speech.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Apr 6, 2018)

> Redacted by staff



Your descent to personal insults indicates that you yourself are making emotionally grounded assessments and arguments, which causes you and your argument to be taken less seriously.

As you see from my previous post, yes, I acknowledged the bi-partisan support this bill had, in that both the left and the right are often quick to stifle free speech these days. We are becoming an increasingly authoritarian government.

However progressivism is not necessarily authoritative.

So in the meantime yes, I will continue to isolate the right wing in my attacks on Puritanism in this country, especially the religious right, which has a history of pursuing the suppression of various kinds of NSFW content, including fully legal porn.

Oh. Which reminds me. It's legal to film porn in some states, like CA. These people get paid. For having sexual encounters. Where would that fall under this bill?


----------



## Troj (Apr 6, 2018)

As usual, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions, aye?


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 6, 2018)

Troj said:


> As usual, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions, aye?


Good intentions, mixed with the complete and utter lack of understanding of what the internet is with the people in charge.


----------



## Infrarednexus (Apr 6, 2018)

FA shouldn't worry about this in my opinion. We haven't broken any laws to my knowledge and we seem to be very good at avoiding it. Furry porn is not illegal in the United States and considering it's been around for this long I doubt it will be gone anytime soon. I wouldn't be upset if we lost Inkbunny though. That place is a breeding ground for the unthinkable.


----------



## Orthogonal (Apr 6, 2018)

Troj said:


> As usual, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions, aye?



And yet, these are very good intentions.

Let us take ourselves out of the equation for a moment.

FOTSA/SESTA is mainly a measure to more effectively sex trafficking, prostitution, and child pornography. The wider Internet has always had darker side catering to illegal enterprises and law enforcement often has to play catch-up when comes to legal tools to use against websites guilty these practices. Websites such as Backpage have become the storefronts for the modern-day slave trade and the FOSTA/SESTA legislation will help prosecutors decisively crack down on websites that promote sex trafficking as well as provide recourse for victims seek restitution. At its heart, this legislation will establish some measure of accountability for those that cynically sell advertising but are unprepared to help curtail sex trafficking and child exploitation.

This is not horrible. FOSTA/SESTA is ushering in a new age of accountability from all online businesses that has been lacking for so long.

We should embrace this.

The EFF and the Internet Association are saying that any online service could theoretically be used to facilitate sex trafficking, and that the law might have a chilling effect on voluntary moderation of websites (as encouraged by the "Good Samaritan provision" of section 230, which states that providers are not liable on account of "any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be objectionable"), as even the mere discovery of sex trafficking content could constitute knowing conduct of participation in a venture, and that dismissing the risk could constitute reckless disregard.

To this, I say being a volunteer moderator is, in a sense, like being a volunteer firefighter. You do not get to choose which fires you fight. Moderators, under this legislation, will be held to account, as will websites, if they do not police their content sufficiently. Law enforcement can be involved quicker and earlier if sites refuse to police themselves.

Let me emphasize this.

Website that have material violating FOSTA/SESTA have the option of removing that content before the authorities get involved. If they do not, the authorities will get involved.

There is still freedom here, as long as you are proactive.


----------



## Orthogonal (Apr 6, 2018)

Infrarednexus said:


> FA shouldn't worry about this in my opinion. We haven't broken any laws to my knowledge and we seem to be very good at avoiding it. Furry porn is not illegal in the United States and considering it's been around for this long I doubt it will be gone anytime soon. I wouldn't be upset if we lost Inkbunny though. That place is a breeding ground for the unthinkable.



Define unthinkable.


----------



## Infrarednexus (Apr 6, 2018)

Orthogonal said:


> Define unthinkable.


Things that might get me banned if I described in full detail. Unthinkable, in the phrase I used it in, applies to the sense that most people would never imagine engaging in something so dark. I get it, I'm a furry and I'm already a questionable member of society to most people, but even I have standards.


----------



## Orthogonal (Apr 6, 2018)

Infrarednexus said:


> Children being raped and tortured, animated bestiality, and I even witnessed necrophilia in graphic detail. I will never look at furries the same way again after walking down that road. Unthinkable, in the phrase I used it in, applies to the sense that most people would never imagine something so dark. I get it, I'm a furry and I'm already a questionable member of society to most people, but even I have standards.



I think we can all agree some proactive policing and tighter standards is not bad thing.


----------



## Infrarednexus (Apr 6, 2018)

Orthogonal said:


> I think we can all agree some proactive policing and tighter standards is not bad thing.


Sorry for editing that post before you quoted it by the way.

It's never a bad thing, and this bill being passed should be a warning for all mature related websites to get their shit together and avoid encouraging law violations. I don't think the furry fandom would ever be the same if we got exposed for the things some of us are guilty of.


----------



## Troj (Apr 6, 2018)

Orthogonal said:


> This is not horrible. FOSTA/SESTA is ushering in a new age of accountability from all online businesses that has been lacking for so long.
> 
> We should embrace this.



Agreed.

The major problem that I see is that the more people tend to fundamentally misunderstand the Internet, the more eager they often are to jump in and regulate it--and that goes double for politicians!

Additionally, Puritanism and squeamishness have traditionally clouded people's judgment vis-a-vis prostitution, pornography, and related matters. 

Sex workers have largely spoken out against FOSTA---even going as far to detail how the law might put them even _more _at risk--and their voices have gone ignored.


----------



## Orthogonal (Apr 6, 2018)

Troj said:


> Agreed.
> 
> The major problem that I see is that the more people tend to fundamentally misunderstand the Internet, the more eager they often are to jump in and regulate it--and that goes double for politicians!
> 
> ...



The argument that "Puritanism and squeamishness have traditionally clouded people's judgment vis-a-vis prostitution, pornography, and related matters" is a double-edged sword that businesses which engage in this criminal activity use to shield themselves from criticism. However, it is worth noting that both liberals and conservatives voted for this measure. There is much collective wisdom here.

Recently, certain online service companies have unleashed major societal catastrophes and faced no accountability. Maybe this law will foster a sense of accountability within them.

Voluntary sex workers have largely have spoken out against the measure. This measure is also intended to help involuntary sex workers who are victims of sex trafficking. Hence the name of the law.


----------



## Troj (Apr 6, 2018)

Well, it _could_ be collective wisdom and a fresh, much-welcome example of bi-partisan cooperation, or it _could_ be another PATRIOT Act-esque example of lazy goodguy badge polishing. "I DID A GOODISH THING! I AM GOODISH! VOTE FOR ME!"

I'm all for greater accountability and better, stronger protection of vulnerable populations, but from what I've read thus far, FOSTA sounds like it's going to potentially create additional problems _on top _of potentially failing to properly address sex trafficking itself.  

At the very least, policy-makers should've consulted the populations they seek to protect, which it sounds like they didn't.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 6, 2018)

Troj said:


> Well, it _could_ be collective wisdom and a fresh, much-welcome example of bi-partisan cooperation, or it _could_ be another PATRIOT Act-esque example of lazy goodguy badge polishing. "I DID A GOODISH THING! I AM GOODISH! VOTE FOR ME!"
> 
> I'm all for greater accountability and better, stronger protection of vulnerable populations, but from what I've read thus far, FOSTA sounds like it's going to potentially create additional problems _on top _of potentially failing to properly address sex trafficking itself.
> 
> At the very least, policy-makers should've consulted the populations they seek to protect, which it sounds like they didn't.


That's not how America works anymore, unfortunately. Studies have shown that ordinary people have no impact whatsoever on how their politicians choose to vote. They do whatever the lobbies tell them to do. America is now a direct democracy for the rich... And a dictatorship for everyone else.


----------



## dogryme6 (Apr 6, 2018)

... Seriously. WHat the hell is this stupid mumbo jumbo written on papyrus that causes the police to get in on more things, that allows them to beat down the innocents or not-so-but-still-kinda innocents more and more. It's almost like a witchcraft ritual, but instead of summoning eldritch abominations it gives undeserved parameters to a totalitarian group of fools.
Almost makes me prefer a State of Nature.
I hate the way these things work / happen.


----------



## Open_Mind (Apr 6, 2018)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> America is now a direct democracy for the rich... And a dictatorship for everyone else.


----------



## dogryme6 (Apr 6, 2018)

One word. Anarchy.  Mwee hee hee. That's all. *mic drop*


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 6, 2018)

dogryme6 said:


> One word. Anarchy.  Mwee hee hee. That's all. *mic drop*


America needs a new revolution. We haven't had one since the civil rights era and Vietnam War protests of the 1960's.


----------



## Troj (Apr 6, 2018)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> Studies have shown that ordinary people have no impact whatsoever on how their politicians choose to vote. They do whatever the lobbies tell them to do. America is now a direct democracy for the rich... And a dictatorship for everyone else.



An oligarchy, in other words.

At the very least, if more people were willing to _register _and then actually _vote; _if they were willing to sustain and extend their activism beyond complaining to friends or congregating once en masse and then never again; and if they pushed their representatives to rein in gerrymandering and campaign contributions, we'd have a fighting chance.


----------



## Pipistrele (Apr 6, 2018)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> America needs a new revolution. We haven't had one since the civil rights era and Vietnam War protests of the 1960's.


Wouldn't call those two eras "revolution", though. An actual revolution is actually a pretty scary thing - the government is overthrown, and a good chunk of the stuff is being started from a blank slate, which results in a prolonged period of drastically decreased quality of life, economic and social struggles, high amount of crime, and sometimes something like famine, all of that until people manage to figure everything out in a new establishment. I was raised furing the aftermath of revolution (the fall of USSR in particular), and I'll assure you, that's not something to be taken lightly.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 6, 2018)

Troj said:


> An oligarchy, in other words.
> 
> At the very least, if more people were willing to _register _and then actually _vote; _if they were willing to sustain and extend their activism beyond complaining to friends or congregating once en masse and then never again; and if they pushed their representatives to rein in gerrymandering and campaign contributions, we'd have a fighting chance.


I hope to god that people are motivated to vote. Part of the problem with America is unwillingness to vote. Voting days should be a national holiday, for starters. And people need to stop perpetuating the myth that voting doesn't count. Sure, it doesn't count as much as it should, but staying home means that you're complicit in whatever bullshit that your congressmen pull. No vote at all is a default "Yes" vote to the incumbent.


Pipistrele said:


> Wouldn't call those two eras "revolution", though. An actual revolution is actually a pretty scary thing - the government is overthrown, and a good chunk of the stuff is being started from a blank slate, which results in a prolonged period of drastically decreased quality of life, economic and social struggles, high amount of crime, and sometimes something like famine, all of that until people manage to figure everything out in a new establishment. I was raised furing the aftermath of revolution (the fall of USSR in particular), and I'll assure you, that's not something to be taken lightly.


Maybe they're not "true" revolutions, like the French and Russian revolutions, but I have heard them referred to "revolutions" before, nonetheless. People protested in droves and wouldn't back down and take "no" for an answer until they got what they wanted.
And yeah.... I've heard that things were very rough for Russia once the USSR broke up. The 90's were a lost decade...


----------



## Troj (Apr 6, 2018)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> I hope to god that people are motivated to vote. Part of the problem with America is unwillingness to vote. Voting days should be a national holiday, for starters. And people need to stop perpetuating the myth that voting doesn't count. Sure, it doesn't count as much as it should, but staying home means that you're complicit in whatever bullshit that your congressmen pull. No vote at all is a default "Yes" vote to the incumbent.



Precisely.

Fundamentally, people need to realize that their cool-dude cynicism is welcomed and celebrated by the Powers That Be.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 6, 2018)

Troj said:


> Precisely.
> 
> Fundamentally, people need to realize that their cool-dude cynicism is welcomed and celebrated by the Powers That Be.


EXACTLY!!! Hit the nail on the head there!


----------



## BahgDaddy (Apr 6, 2018)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> Good intentions, mixed with the complete and utter lack of understanding of what the internet is with the people in charge.



The path to hell is paved with good intentions!

Actually it's just paved. Period. That's all that matter.


----------



## Manek Iridius (Apr 6, 2018)

It's just another case of people being idiots. The fact that anyone is surprised is amazing, the fact that there are people who aren't concerned (and support it) is depressing. That is all.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 6, 2018)

Manek Iridius said:


> It's just another case of people being idiots. The fact that anyone is surprised is amazing, the fact that there are people who aren't concerned (and support it) is depressing. That is all.


Being a politician and being an idiot seems to go hand and hand these days...


----------



## Manek Iridius (Apr 7, 2018)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> Being a politician and being an idiot seems to go hand and hand these days...



Person. Being a person and being an idiot.
Always. Not 'these days,' always.


----------



## RinjiPantera (Apr 7, 2018)

Orthogonal said:


> And yet, these are very good intentions.
> 
> Let us take ourselves out of the equation for a moment.
> 
> ...



No, there isn't freedom. Don't you see? A lot of websites are affected. Personals we could use to discreetly meet people have been shut down because of this. The wording in this bill is so vague, that it opens up a giant can of worms on how much censoring this can cause. This is like setting fire to a house, just to take out some termites.


----------



## Orthogonal (Apr 7, 2018)

RinjiPantera said:


> No, there isn't freedom. Don't you see? A lot of websites are affected. Personals we could use to discreetly meet people have been shut down because of this. The wording in this bill is so vague, that it opens up a giant can of worms on how much censoring this can cause. This is like setting fire to a house, just to take out some termites.



I will admit the wording is tad vague and it could ensnare more than hookup services, but I have confidence FA will take the measures need to make sure it passes muster.


----------



## quoting_mungo (Apr 7, 2018)

Orthogonal said:


> Voluntary sex workers have largely have spoken out against the measure. This measure is also intended to help involuntary sex workers who are victims of sex trafficking. Hence the name of the law.


Actually, trafficking survivors have _also_ spoken out against this bill and said if it had been law at the time they were in a trafficking situation they would have been at more risk/might not have survived at all. Traffickers are not suddenly going to stop doing their thing because Craigslist personals got taken down. They're going to place their victims at greater risk by putting them in less safe situations in order to maintain profits.

You also need to realize that "sex trafficking" is basically legislator code for "sex work", especially but not limited to prostitution. Saying "this is a bill to combat sex trafficking" is just a way of minimizing opposition while getting support from people who do not understand the sex trade.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 7, 2018)

Orthogonal said:


> I will admit the wording is tad vague and it could ensnare more than hookup services, but I have confidence FA will take the measures need to make sure it passes muster.


I feel like Dragoneer and the other staff should make contact with a lawyer or two. After all, a hole that has failed to be plugged could result in the FBI shutting down the whole site and bringing the staff into police custody. This has already begun to happen. Y'all have heard about Backpage being shut down by the feds and its owner facing indictments, right? I'm not saying that they're innocent or anything, but FOSTA-SESTA is like burning down a house to eradicate a termite infestation, like someone above said.


----------



## Dragoneer (Apr 7, 2018)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> I feel like Dragoneer and the other staff should make contact with a lawyer or two. After all, a hole that has failed to be plugged could result in the FBI shutting down the whole site and bringing the staff into police custody. This has already begun to happen. Y'all have heard about Backpage being shut down by the feds and its owner facing indictments, right? I'm not saying that they're innocent or anything, but FOSTA-SESTA is like burning down a house to eradicate a termite infestation, like someone above said.


Backpage was raided months ago and openly had posts promoting prostitution running on their forums. It's hard to defend Backpage when, if you view their history, they had a massive problem which specifically listed the reasons why FOSTA was created. Backpage only removed those sections later on AFTER the FBI was already involved -- and it was too late by then. Backpage was shut down because they refused to address the problem WHEN it was a problem.

The root problem of FOSTA is the law is quasi-ripe for abuse. If people are engaging in particular activities it could result in website owners being held liable. _Could._ But this means that any community on the internet which allows user-submit content could, in theory, be at risk. I have to be honest that I think concerns about FOSTA in regards to FA are somewhat overblown. Yes, the wording is nebulous, but this is something which could impact dating/hookup sites more than anything. Apps/communities like Grindr or Tinder are far more at risk than FA.

That's not to say there are no potential risks. It's good to be aware of risks and impact, but FA is not the kind of service which FOSTA targets. Could it? Sure. Will it be? Probably not. Again, it's good to be aware of what's out there and how it could target you but I feel like sometimes it's best to keep moving on. Be mindful, keep aware, but move forward and address things as they come.


----------



## Simo (Apr 7, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> What's funny is D.C. is probably rife wit prostitution.



It is.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 14, 2018)

Does anybody know if this is going to be challenged legally? I'll be highly disappointed if it's not...


----------



## Orthogonal (Apr 14, 2018)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> Does anybody know if this is going to be challenged legally? I'll be highly disappointed if it's not...



It would need to be challenged by a entity with standing recognized by the court, the necessary funds to pay for a legal team to move this through the appeals courts and inevitably to the Supreme Court, and that has business and or interests that would be effectively threatened by this legislation. Plus this hypothetical would need to be able to weather the considerable political backlash that comes attacking legislation branded as protecting sex trafficking and child pornography victim.

So the short answer is not during this administration, if ever.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 14, 2018)

I'm so afraid that this is the beginning of a slippery slope that will end up in the complete and utter ban of porn, hentai and anything NSFW on the internet. A group that supported this bill wants to do that....


----------



## shapeless0ne (Apr 14, 2018)

and just when I was starting to think 2018 will be better than 2017......


----------



## shapeless0ne (Apr 14, 2018)

...and the FUNNY thing about this is, the bill in itself increases government power. what where Republicans all about again? oh yeah, small government....I guess republicans don't stand for anything anymore.


----------



## MetroFox2 (Apr 14, 2018)

Hey, remember when people say the UK banned porn and that makes it a fascist state with censorship? I do, and I laugh, I hope the people who kept on about that feel like right pricks.

Okay, vent over, not trying to start shit, just had to get that off my chest.

Yeah, I'm not 100% familiar with the bill, but someone described it to me as an anti-porn law hidden under the guise of protecting victims of sexual assault and so on. Surely this also only effects American servers though, which makes the bill about as watertight as a cheese-grater, right? I don't know how America would do anything about this though, because from what I've heard, it seems all your courts and judges are in the palm of the government, and that's just fucked-up.

Again, just my interpretation of the matter, I'm only working with what little I've got. Also, did need to get the above off my chest, hope the I managed to recover at least a little. Again, I have no intention of starting shit with that.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 14, 2018)

I am 100% sure that when the U.S. decides to ban porn, it'll be with the tagline of "Think of the children!!!!!!" I'm sure that they'll involve kids somehow, so that any dissenters will look like pricks for disagreeing. I just hope that that day never comes.....


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 14, 2018)

shapeless0ne said:


> ...and the FUNNY thing about this is, the bill in itself increases government power. what where Republicans all about again? oh yeah, small government....I guess republicans don't stand for anything anymore.


Republicans support anything that'll transform America into a Christian version of Saudi Arabia or the UAE. By any means necessary.


----------



## shapeless0ne (Apr 14, 2018)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> Republicans support anything that'll transform America into a Christian version of Saudi Arabia or the UAE. By any means necessary.


there's a meme for that:


----------



## shapeless0ne (Apr 14, 2018)

back on topic (sorta) there's another site to worry about my friends....Furzu.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 14, 2018)

shapeless0ne said:


> back on topic (sorta) there's another site to worry about my friends....Furzu.


What's that?


----------



## shapeless0ne (Apr 14, 2018)

another furry dating site, link here: Ferzu


----------



## Infrarednexus (Apr 14, 2018)

shapeless0ne said:


> another furry dating site, link here: Ferzu


I looked at it. It just seems like your typical dating site. Nothing explicit from what I saw. Why would you worry about this?


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 14, 2018)

shapeless0ne said:


> another furry dating site, link here: Ferzu


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 14, 2018)

Infrarednexus said:


> I looked at it. It just seems like your typical dating site. Nothing explicit from what I saw. Why would you worry about this?


Because some fuckhead MIGHT misuse the service to hook-up.


----------



## shapeless0ne (Apr 14, 2018)

Infrarednexus said:


> I looked at it. It just seems like your typical dating site. Nothing explicit from what I saw. Why would you worry about this?


I am worried because the law uses loose wording, and it's not viewpoint neutral. making it seem to me like it's basically a witch hunting law that the puritans would be proud of.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 14, 2018)

shapeless0ne said:


> I am worried because the law uses loose wording, and it's not viewpoint neutral. making it basically a witch hunting law that the puritans would be proud of.


Maybe contact the site staff?
Although, it's a good sign, I guess, that it's still up and running.


----------



## shapeless0ne (Apr 14, 2018)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> Maybe contact the site staff?
> Although, it's a good sign, I guess, that it's still up and running.


there is but one possible ray of light for our furry sites.....this law might only ever be enacted if there are so many reports of sex trafficking on one site. and because furry sites aren't really populated.....


----------



## Infrarednexus (Apr 14, 2018)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> Because some fuckhead MIGHT misuse the service to hook-up.


Well people abuse the system to engage with minors/sex trafficking with nearly all social and dating websites. One incident wouldn't guarantee that this site would be on the death list. Add to the fact that only furries would be interested in dating other furries, making the population of people even smaller, thus reducing the incident rate. Finally, this bill seems like it is more focused on criminal activity instead of what gets people off, so as long as furries don't break the law, I see no reason why even worry.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 14, 2018)

Infrarednexus said:


> Well people abuse the system to engage with minors/sex trafficking with nearly all social and dating websites. One incident wouldn't guarantee that this site would be on the death list. Add to the fact that only furries would be interested in dating other furries, making the population of people even smaller, thus reducing the incident rate. Finally, this bill seems like it is more focused on criminal activity instead of what gets people off, so as long as furries don't break the law, I see no reason why even worry.


Hopefully. But in a lot of cases, it takes one bad actor to fuck it up for everyone else... :/


----------



## quoting_mungo (Apr 15, 2018)

Infrarednexus said:


> One incident wouldn't guarantee that this site would be on the death list.


The problem is that prior to SESTA/FOSTA, the site owner would not be criminally liable for that incident, unless you can prove they knew about it and knowingly let it continue. With the new law, that one incident could get the site owner indicted for facilitating child sex trafficking. That's the risk Craigslist and Pounced haven't wanted to take.

(This also means that the location of the servers only matters to a limited degree if the site _owner_ is in America.)


----------



## Orthogonal (Apr 18, 2018)

quoting_mungo said:


> The problem is that prior to SESTA/FOSTA, the site owner would not be criminally liable for that incident, unless you can prove they knew about it and knowingly let it continue. With the new law, that one incident could get the site owner indicted for facilitating child sex trafficking. That's the risk Craigslist and Pounced haven't wanted to take.
> 
> (This also means that the location of the servers only matters to a limited degree if the site _owner_ is in America.)



Perhaps this will properly motivate site owners to crack down on sex trafficking, prostitution, and child pornography. In my experience, people fuck up less when their feet are to the fire.


----------



## quoting_mungo (Apr 18, 2018)

Orthogonal said:


> Perhaps this will properly motivate site owners to crack down on sex trafficking, prostitution, and child pornography. In my experience, people fuck up less when their feet are to the fire.


In my experience, when you put people's feet to the fire over shit they will never be able to completely control, there's a lot of collateral damage. Just imagine if you imposed a fine for inaccurate weather forecasts. Any forecasts that remained would be uselessly full of hedging.


----------



## Zhalo (Apr 18, 2018)

Orthogonal said:


> Perhaps this will properly motivate site owners to crack down on sex trafficking, prostitution, and child pornography. In my experience, people fuck up less when their feet are to the fire.


Many websites are not run by paid staff, so they don't even have the means to enforce even if they wanted to. That is why that one furry dating site shut down because all the staff are volunteers and they would not have the manpower to enforce effectively, neither did they want to be liable, to become sex offenders if they did not enforce _good enough. 
_
Many sites are very loosely moderated as well, sites such as craigslist, to make the owners of craigslist liable for the actions of everyone that uses the site is ridiculous.

It is the digital equivalent of saying the owner of an apartment complex is responsible for anything illegal that their tenets do even if he has no knowledge of it.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 18, 2018)

And this is why I fear for FA's future....


----------



## BahgDaddy (Apr 18, 2018)

Unless there's evidence that FA members are facilitating sex trafficking, I don't actually foresee a problem. Otherwise Pornhub would be taken down, and those Christian republicans aren't about to let their gay porn go away.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 18, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> Unless there's evidence that FA members are facilitating sex trafficking, I don't actually foresee a problem. Otherwise Pornhub would be taken down, and those Christian republicans aren't about to let their gay porn go away.


Weird, I thought that they wanted to make sure that every nook and cranny of the internet consisted of content appropriate for the "teh kidz".


----------



## BahgDaddy (Apr 18, 2018)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> Weird, I thought that they wanted to make sure that every nook and cranny of the internet consisted of content appropriate for the "teh kidz".



They don't want kids knowledgeable about any sexual stuff because then it's easier to take advantage of them. 

Excuse me, I mean family values. 

To be fair this had bipartisan support, so I don't know why Democrats we're supporting it. They probably didnt read the damn bill.


----------



## ThunderSnowolf (Apr 18, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> They don't want kids knowledgeable about any sexual stuff because then it's easier to take advantage of them.
> 
> Excuse me, I mean family values.
> 
> To be fair this had bipartisan support, so I don't know why Democrats we're supporting it. They probably didnt read the damn bill.


I sadly still saw adult content as a kid. All the time. I don't think they care quite as much as they claim to.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Apr 18, 2018)

ThunderSnowolf said:


> I sadly still saw adult content as a kid. All the time. I don't think they care quite as much as they claim to.



I saw more than my fair share as well. It'was very easy for a horny 11 year old me to find. Honestly a lot of it was upsetting, but more because I didn't know what was being done, and it was often being done in a bad way (like rape porn for instance) that it messed with my mind for a while. That's why some schools are now talking openly with students about different types of porn, and how they can affect the young mind, and how's it's also fictional and doesn't represent what real people ACTUALLY WANT TO DO.


----------



## ThunderSnowolf (Apr 18, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> I saw more than my fair share as well. It'was very easy for a horny 11 year old me to find. Honestly a lot of it was upsetting, but more because I didn't know what was being done, and it was often being done in a bad way (like rape porn for instance) that it messed with my mind for a while. That's why some schools are now talking openly with students about different types of porn, and how they can affect the young mind, and how's it's also fictional and doesn't represent what real people ACTUALLY WANT TO DO.


Well, I usually found it by accident while browsing. Safe Search may not be 100% accurate, but I hope there's at least a way to improve it to make images like those less likely.


----------

