Legislation relating to porn sites

[Glazar]

I have just seen the new guidance issued by ATVOD regarding who is required to register with them.

It follows adverse rulings by Offcom which restrict the scope of ATVOD to regulating "television-like" programmes. This of course was always what the law said, but ATVOD were cheekily trying to expand their territory.

Meanwhile, over at the BBFC, I see that their remit is only for "hard-copy" material.

Who, then, regulates on-line porn? As far as I can see, as long as you avoid "depraving and corrupting" anybody (Obscene Publications Act), keep your stuff away from minors (common sense), avoid "extreme porn" (Criminal Justice and Immigration Act), and ensure all participants consent, then you can do what you like.

Am I right?

[andy at handiwork]

It would be very satisfying for ATVOD to be brought down a peg or two. Sadly I think you will find their malign and baleful influence will probably remain for a long time yet.

[rgb]

Having just read ATVOD's latest version of who needs to notify ()
they don't seem to have backed down at all on their intention to control on-line porn.

[william]

maybe they need taken down a peg or to - asked to back up their juristiction and to what the law actually covers - its a mine field out there...

It just looks to me like atvod are trying to increase their area of coverage so that they can increase the amount of money they get. a win win for them if no one stands up to them and makes challenges into the way they handle thier affairs....

[william]

Regulatory fees
Service providers must pay a fee to ATVOD in relation to each On Demand Programme Service they provide and will receive invoices with respect to each notified service. The fees charged by ATVOD are the subject of a public consultation each year and are approved by Ofcom.

The structure and level of the fees for the year to 31 March 2014 was the subject of a public consultation which closed on 26 March 2013. Details of the consultation are available in the News & consultations section of this website.

On 20 May 2013 Ofcom approved a new fee tariff which retains the progressive three band fee structure based on the turnover of the service provider, and three concessionary rates for non-commercial, micro scale and small scale providers. However, the structure of new tariff differs from the previous tariff in the following respect: within each band, 'first service' and 'additional service' fees have been replaced with 'single outlet' and 'multiple outlet' fees to reflect the simplification of the notification requirements introduced for 2013-14. Average fees have been reduced by 5%. A summary of the 2013-14 fee tariff is published on this page along with a full statement on 2013-14 fees.

Service providers will be charged the Super A Rate unless they demonstrate that they are eligible for a lower rate, or for a concesionary rate. Application forms for Rate A, Rate B and the three concessionary rates are published on this page.

ATVOD will continue to work with members of the Industry Forum to consider appropriate fee arrangements for future years. Minutes of the working party established for this purpose are published on this page.

[Glazar]

The new guidance emphasises the fact that the service has to be "televison-like". This follows an Ofcom ruling a few months ago which rejected ATVOD's claim that a specified service fell within its remit.

Given this, ATVOD has indeed backed off a little.

[rgb]

"Television-like" has always been the rule. Porn sites fall foul of this because they have 20+ minute episodes which ATVOD say are like TV programmes. This hasn't changed.
This recent ruling involved short clips of mainstream programmes and OFCOM overruled ATVOD and said they were not "television-like" . I wonder if the same ruling would have been made if they had been porn clips..

[one eyed jack]

I've always found the TV like angle a bit dubious when you consider that the material produced would never be shown on television anyway

That said, I've read the Ben Yates report on his meeting with ATVOD and it confirmed what i suspected that ATVOD are just making the rules they want everyone to play by without any real idea how the business works and why ATVOD in effect is unworkable short of shutting down porn sites altogether

The game will get very interesting when they realise the porn industry in the UK is probably 90% made by those who steal it or make their own.

The adult industry might have welcomed ATVOD if it didnt allow tube sites and file sharing to flourish so unless they meet legitimiate business running, tax paying producers and webmasters on this they might get stone walled.

Its amazing how these things are not challenged because the adult industry is so fractured when you hear something like ATVOD everyone looks at you like "What? Who? Me?" as if this is about someone else and not them

Anyone who films porn for profit or fun no matter how big or small should understand this involves you all and given the amount of calls from worried producers (outside of UKAP) who got those letters tells me you have no idea how to play the game you've walked into half way through. Keeping your head buried in the sand can only you will be grabbed by the hips and humped dry and this is what ATVOD is to the adult industry

Many still have no idea what this means to them starting out because they dont pay attention and do research

You cannot simply walk into the business, pick up a camera and think you will make money without understanding how the machine works

As for TVX representing the adult industry?

Pur-lease.

As a broadcast company they dont even compete with a majority of UK sites (even the softer ones) so how can the business be fairly represented by the say so of one man whose agenda is self serving in getting rid of the competition to facilitate the monopoly of his own?

If that is not the reason then why are other big companies not on the panel with this same chap?