What's legal and what's not legal in hentai laws?

[Lacan]

I'm talking about here in America. I know that Shota and Loli are illegal here, and I wouldn't be caught dead looking at it *mature adult women all the way for me*. But is there any other things that may be illegal in Hentai that I might not know about?

[Leader Desslock]

Any explicit depiction of a minor engaged in sexual activity produced for the purposes of audience titilation would be illegal.

I think the color green is also illegal.

Anything else is fair game.

[waltsoph3]

Waoh green!? What i assuming that is a joke. lol

[Lacan]

Any explicit depiction of a minor engaged in sexual activity produced for the purposes of audience titilation would be illegal.

I think the color green is also illegal.

Anything else is fair game.

Does that mean I can't look at She Hulk Hentai? :P

[fujyoshi]

I think the color green is also illegal.


green is my favorite color -_=

kz yea in terms of america all that stuff is pretty much illegal I think.

[waltsoph3]

woah woah woah. I meen what if some one is wearing a hot green outfit? Is that illigal too? Because that makes no sense.

[SHAMETHELITISTS]

^_^woah woah woah. I meen what if some one is wearing a hot green outfit? Is that illigal too? Because that makes no sense.

I think Desslock is just joking because as we all know : In Hentai...................(to quote the name of a TV show that was around long before 90% of the folks on these forums were born) Almost Everything Goes!save for loli and shota
IMO however Scat should be illegal cuz it's gross! Not but should be!

[DocWatson]

I'm talking about here in America. I know that Shota and Loli are illegal here
Citation, please? You might want to read:

"Ask John: Is Lolicon Still Legal In America?" (http://www.animenation.net/blog/2006/01/30/ask-john-is-lolicon-still-legal-in-america/)

"Ask John: Is Lolicon Still Legal In America Now?" (http://www.animenation.net/blog/2006/08/01/ask-john-is-lolicon-still-legal-in-america-now/)

"Civil Rights Law at Issue in High Court Rulings" (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/22/washington/22scotus.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=copa%20%20pornography&st=cse), The New York Times (see paragraph 2)

[Sox]

I don't think Lilo or Shota should be illegal PURELY because it falls under the catagory of Freedom of Speech. I understand that the Bush Administration had their hearts in the right place when they signed that bill into law, they wanted to get rid of anything that might sexualize children.

However, there are already tons of things that sexualize children that are legal. For example:

1. Children's things and bikinis that you can buy on the internet
2. Children's beauty pagents
3. Those stupid Bratz Dolls
4. Play make-up for kids

By the way, I would like to take this opportunity to express my disgust with lilo and shota. I find it totally creepy and vile, and do not view it at all. However, I still think it should be legal. Just because I like the Constitution that much.

[Dr. Ezra]

Why do you call it lilo, Sox?

[Bradster]

If Lilo is illegal, shouldn't Stitch also be illegal? (Though IIRC they both are IRL..)

[Sox]

Why do you call it lilo, Sox?

It's a regional dialect where I'm from. I guess it doesn't make much sense.

[Leader Desslock]

I don't think Lilo or Shota should be illegal PURELY because it falls under the catagory of Freedom of Speech.
Actually, it doesn't. There are several types of expression that are not protected by the First Amendment in the US. Child pornography is one of them

And until current laws are changed, even some forms of art - specifically those that depict minors engaged in explicit sexual acts, produced in the prurient interest - are classified as child pornography.

...when they signed that bill into law...
See how you're writing that? Past tense. As in it did happen.

Until the law is repealed, the law is the law. And if we're talking about "What's Legal?", then what people might think is 'Right' is irrelevant to the discussion. All that matters is the text of the law, and according to that text, it's illegal.

Tons of things that sexualize children that are legal. For example:

1. Children's things and bikinis that you can buy on the internet
2. Children's beauty pagents
3. Those stupid Bratz Dolls
4. Play make-up for kids
Not one of those things is "produced in the prurient interests", so they're not pornography, they're protected speech, and they're legal.

The fact that pedophiles likely find the material titillating doesn't change the legality of the content, nor the artist's expressive intent.

However, I still think it should be legal. Just because I like the Constitution that much.
The First Amendment does not apply, legally. If it did, the ACLU would be all over defending that Handley guy in Iowa. The fact that they're staying away from the case (last I knew) should tell you that this isn't a civil rights issue.


In addition to the color Green, I think that Mauve should also be illegal, just because it sounds like it's up to something. And don't even get me started on Ecru or Puce.

[DocWatson]

I don't think Lilo or Shota should be illegal PURELY because it falls under the catagory of Freedom of Speech.
Actually, it doesn't. There are several types of expression that are not protected by the First Amendment in the US. Child pornography is one of them

And until current laws are changed, even some forms of art - specifically those that depict minors engaged in explicit sexual acts, produced in the prurient interest - are classified as child pornography.

...when they signed that bill into law...
See how you're writing that? Past tense. As in it did happen.

Until the law is repealed, the law is the law. And if we're talking about "What's Legal?", then what people might think is 'Right' is irrelevant to the discussion. All that matters is the text of the law, and according to that text, it's illegal.
However, the U.S. courts have been consistent in striking down efforts to criminalize pornography of virtual (non-existent) underaged persons—see the links I provided above.

The First Amendment does not apply, legally. If it did, the ACLU would be all over defending that Handley guy in Iowa. The fact that they're staying away from the case (last I knew) should tell you that this isn't a civil rights issue.
Neil Gaiman (http://journal.neilgaiman.com/2008/12/why-defend-freedom-of-icky-speech.html), and more importantly, the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund (http://www.cbldf.org/pr/archives/000372.shtml), disagree.

Edit: More here (http://splashpage.mtv.com/2008/11/24/neil-gaiman-on-the-obscenity-of-manga-collector-christopher-handleys-trial/).

[Lacan]

the law is the law.

Ugh I hate that word. The law needs to take a vacation. Then again I don't know if we do have rights. The late George Carlin said that Rights are make believe like the bogeyman.

Ironically on the "awesome thread 2009" on the off topics section of this site, there is a anime milf poster of a women thats twice the age or a teen or young adult I think, and yet she looks very young due to the artstyle, The government could easily think that a anime 40 year old woman could be a child.

Hopefully the government won't ban Hentai/porn in the future, like China does.

[Leader Desslock]

However, the U.S. courts have been consistent in striking down efforts to criminalize pornography of virtual (non-existent) underaged persons—see the links I provided above.
I did read the links you provided above. The third one isn't even relevant to the discussion, if you read the specific reasons for the decisions made in the cases involved.

As far as the other two links, the Supreme court has yet to extend full First Amendment protections to material deemed obscene by the Miller Test, which is why I specified 'material produced in the prurient interests' in my post. Various rulings have danced around the issue, because the court doesn't want to get involved any farther than it has to. Rulings have been made that specify that specific aspects of the law, when used to interpret certain types of related (but not obscene) material (like advertisments) are overbroad. But at the core, certain materials are still deemed obscene, and those materials do not have First Amendment protection.

That established case precedent that protected those who might send out a non-obscene ad in the mail for material classified as obscene. Since the ad itself is not obscene, distribution of that ad is protected as Free Speech. But! That ruling didn't establish case precedent for obscene material itself, nor did it repeal the law in question. The Supreme court also overturned this ruling anyway, ruling in favor of the law as written.

This judgment was seen as ambiguous in terms of a previous ruling on a different law entirely. But the judgment (however incongruous it might be to previous judgements) is what stands, the PROTECT Act has not been repealed, the law stands as written, and until it is formally repealed, that's the law of the land.

Wrong or right doesn't matter to a discussion of "what's legal". Precedent on a different law doesn't matter to a discussion of "what's legal". Until such time as that law is amended to eliminate the confusion or repealed, then Child Pornography includes:

a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting, that--

`(1)(A) depicts a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and

`(B) is obscene; or

`(2)(A) depicts an image that is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in graphic bestiality, sadistic or masochistic abuse, or sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex; and

`(B) lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value;

Which makes it still illegal to possess and and even moreso to distribute via interstate commerce.

Thanks to the 4th Amendment, authorities can't come breaking in your door to see if you might have visual representations of minors engaged in explicit sexual acts, but if they saw you passing the stuff out, you'd be overstepping the bounds of your 1st Amendment rights.

Neil Gaiman (http://journal.neilgaiman.com/2008/12/why-defend-freedom-of-icky-speech.html), and more importantly, the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund (http://www.cbldf.org/pr/archives/000372.shtml), disagree.
They can feel free to disagree all they want, but until their case is actually resolved one way or the other, the law, as it stands, is the law, and this thread is concerned with what's legal. Which is not defined by right or wrong, but what is currently codified in the legal statutes. Right now, as I post this, those statutes have neither been repealed nor amended.


On a personal note, off-topic and unrelated to matters of legality, Neil Gaiman should go back to making comics, and the CBLDF can kiss my hairy French backside. That's just an editorial comment on my part and should be taken as such.


Ugh I hate that word.
If you're not interested in hearing about what the law says, then don't ask questions like "what's legal?" Because "what's legal" is defined by law. That's the definition.

[Lacan]

^
I know its the law. I originally thought that certain other types of Hentai were also not allowed in the US, besides minor stuff being illegal.

[Nexus18]

Any explicit depiction of a minor engaged in sexual activity produced for the purposes of audience titilation would be illegal.

I think the color green is also illegal.

Anything else is fair game.
thats odd cause in canada Your able to get it I know
this cause I ordered The story of little monica with out knowing it because
I thought it was just about the stripper cat but its probably legal here then.

[Leader Desslock]

^ I'm obviously talking about US laws, not Canadian laws, of which I know nothing.

You folks north of the border have probably legalized the color green, you perverted ********.

[SHAMETHELITISTS]

Leader Desslock said:

In addition to the color Green, I think that Mauve should also be illegal, just because it sounds like it's up to something. And don't even get me started on Ecru or Puce.
:P

Hey Desslock, you seem color/fashion savy, are you related to Mr Blackwell?

[DocWatson]

^ I'm obviously talking about US laws, not Canadian laws, of which I know nothing.

You folks north of the border have probably legalized the color green, you perverted ********.
Canada's import law(s) are more restrictive (or more restrictively enforced) than those of the United States—see gomorrahy.com, "canada hentai.com" (http://www.animenation.net/forums/showthread.php?t=197891), and "Canada bans hentai titles" (http://www.animenation.net/forums/showthread.php?t=212637).

[Sox]

So, if Lilicon and Shotacon are illegal (which I haven't gotten a straight answer), how exactly black and white is that? I mean, what if someone LOOKS underage, but they are actually 18 or over? Or what if their age is never mentioned?

[Leader Desslock]

So, if Lilicon and Shotacon are illegal (which I haven't gotten a straight answer), how exactly black and white is that? I mean, what if someone LOOKS underage, but they are actually 18 or over? Or what if their age is never mentioned?
You're asking for your question to be answered in a way that the law wasn't written. Since no case precedent has been set to cover the examples you list, then all you're going to get as an answer is exactly what's been sid so far: (i.e.: the text of the law, as quoted).

You'll have to find your own answers from that.

Personally, I think "graphic depictions of minors engaged in sexual acts, produced in the prurient interest" is pretty darn clear.

Skuld, from Ah! My Goddess is many, many hundreds of years old, but her physical manifestation on this world is that of a prepubescent girl (a minor). If you showed a picture of her engaged in explicitly depicted graphic sexual acts with Sigel (another character who's quite old but looks even younger than Skuld), then the law really isn't going to care what A!MG canon lists as Skuld's age. The courts are going to say "you're showing a twelve year old getting shagged, and you deserve to go to jail for that."

Me, I'd throw you in jail for writing a non-canon yuri lemon fanfic, but that's just me.

[Sox]

You're asking for your question to be answered in a way that the law wasn't written. Since no case precedent has been set to cover the examples you list, then all you're going to get as an answer is exactly what's been sid so far: (i.e.: the text of the law, as quoted).

You'll have to find your own answers from that.

Personally, I think "graphic depictions of minors engaged in sexual acts, produced in the prurient interest" is pretty darn clear.

Skuld, from Ah! My Goddess is many, many hundreds of years old, but her physical manifestation on this world is that of a prepubescent girl (a minor). If you showed a picture of her engaged in explicitly depicted graphic sexual acts with Sigel (another character who's quite old but looks even younger than Skuld), then the law really isn't going to care what A!MG canon lists as Skuld's age. The courts are going to say "you're showing a twelve year old getting shagged, and you deserve to go to jail for that."

Me, I'd throw you in jail for writing a non-canon yuri lemon fanfic, but that's just me.


Well, I think any lawyer worth his salt would argue that it DOES matter if a character's age is mentioned, in spite of how they look. Because the law says that a MINOR depicted and engaged in sexual activity is illegal. It says nothing about how the character in question looks. If the government doesn't like that people have found a loop-hole into the law, then it's their fault for not being descriptive enough.

And I don't know what a "non-canon yuri lemon fanfic" is but i'm pretty sure I've never written one. And i'm also pretty sure it's covered as free-speech, otherwise the novel Lolita would be banned...in America that is.

[Leader Desslock]

And I don't know what a "non-canon yuri lemon fanfic" is but i'm pretty sure I've never written one. And i'm also pretty sure it's covered as free-speech, otherwise the novel Lolita would be banned...in America that is.
I can see you're not real clear on what a punchline is, either.

[Sox]

I can see you're not real clear on what a punchline is, either.


No, I got it. I was just calling your bluff :P

[SHAMETHELITISTS]

No, I got it. I was just calling your bluff :P

Thank God,Buddah, allah, or Science or whomever you trust that certain people aren't in politics, or else ...................

[Leader Desslock]

^^ I was bluffing?

And Lolita is a non-canon yuri lemon fanfic... how, exactly? I wasn't aware that Nabokov used characters lifted from a serial narrative to tell his tale.

You obviously think that telling a jury of your peers that the prepubescent bodies they see depicted in Exhibit A are, in terms of the narrative, actually the physical manifestation of of centuries-old divine being and an old animatronic doll from early post-war era Japan. That being the case, both characters are actually above the age of consent, and thus the explicitly drawn tongue <-> genital contact on page 18 (with particular detail given to various bodily and hydraulic fluids dripping from their prepubescent genitalia) is totally cool. Really, even though Skuld is wearing a Japanese elementary school uniform and Sigel's teddy-bear panties are hanging from the lamp, these two characters are, in terms of their age in the A!MG universe, geriatrics. Heck, neither of them is even human, so it's no more pornographic than if it was a drawing of Casper the Friendly Ghost humping a desk lamp. And oh, doesn't the frame showing Sigel's double-rocket-punch penetration of Skuld have literary merit? Clearly a Mazinger-Z reference.

I dunno about you, but I think that'd be a hard sell to any jury forced to look at a cartoon of two children engaged in kinky, explicit sex. Tell what you want about the narrative to a jury, but Mr. And Mrs. America are going to see elementary school girls in a raunchy lesbian sex scene - Beyond Any Reasonable Doubt.

Any defense lawyer worth his salt would plea bargain before they EVER went to trial on that one. Especially if there was an A!MG fan on the jury, because any true A!MG fan would vote for the death penalty after seeing a doujin like that.

[SHAMETHELITISTS]

^^ I was bluffing?

And Lolita is a non-canon yuri lemon fanfic... how, exactly? I wasn't aware that Nabokov used characters lifted from a serial narrative to tell his tale.

You obviously think that telling a jury of your peers that the prepubescent bodies they see depicted in Exhibit A are, in terms of the narrative, actually the physical manifestation of of centuries-old divine being and an old animatronic doll from early post-war era Japan. That being the case, both characters are actually above the age of consent, and thus the explicitly drawn tongue <-> genital contact on page 18 (with particular detail given to various bodily and hydraulic fluids dripping from their prepubescent genitalia) is totally cool. Really, even though Skuld is wearing a Japanese elementary school uniform and Sigel's teddy-bear panties are hanging from the lamp, these two characters are, in terms of their age in the A!MG universe, geriatrics. Heck, neither of them is even human, so it's no more pornographic than if it was a drawing of Casper the Friendly Ghost humping a desk lamp. And oh, doesn't the frame showing Sigel's double-rocket-punch penetration of Skuld have literary merit? Clearly a Mazinger-Z reference.

I dunno about you, but I think that'd be a hard sell to any jury forced to look at a cartoon of two children engaged in kinky, explicit sex. Tell what you want about the narrative to a jury, but Mr. And Mrs. America are going to see elementary school girls in a raunchy lesbian sex scene - Beyond Any Reasonable Doubt.

Any defense lawyer worth his salt would plea bargain before they EVER went to trial on that one. Especially if there was an A!MG fan on the jury, because any true A!MG fan would vote for the death penalty after seeing a doujin like that.

Desslock....... telling the harsh truth like a mother...you know what!

[bobble]

is watching streamed hentai for free on the internet illegal? even if its loli? personally, i try to avoid loli/shota, but when it comes to hentai, its hard. sometimes they sneak it up on you. secondly, what falls under obscene? would stuff like tentacle rape be obscene and illlegal? three hentai series i like are bible black, hell knight ingrid, and g-spot express. are any of those illegal? i've also just started watching bondage game.

[DocWatson]

is watching streamed hentai for free on the internet illegal?
Only if the anime is uploaded without the permission of the owner—Anime News Network, Hulu, and Crunchyroll offer legal streaming anime. For hentai there is DMM, Pinpai-TV, Getchu.com, and an English site I can't mention because in addition to legal content it also hosts bootlegs. :-P The Critical Mass Video, JapanAnime, and Adult Source Media material it hosts is perfectly legal, but the Trimax anime stuff isn't.

even if its loli? personally, i try to avoid loli/shota, but when it comes to hentai, its hard. sometimes they sneak it up on you. secondly, what falls under obscene? would stuff like tentacle rape be obscene and illlegal?
It depends upon in which country and local jurisdiction you are. For Japan's take, see "Obscenity and Article 175 of the Japanese Penal Code: A Short Introduction to Japanese Censorship" (http://redsiglo21.com/eiga9/articulos/obscenity.html).

three hentai series i like are bible black, hell knight ingrid, and g-spot express. are any of those illegal? i've also just started watching bondage game.
That depends upon the source. If you are not downloading them from DMM, Pinpai-TV, or (in the case of Makai Kishi Ingrid) DLsite (which does not stream), they are almost certainly pirated copies and therefore illegal.

[bobble]

Only if the anime is uploaded without the permission of the owner—Anime News Network, Hulu, and Crunchyroll offer legal streaming anime. For hentai there is DMM, Pinpai-TV, Getchu.com, and an English site I can't mention because in addition to legal content it also hosts bootlegs. :-P The Critical Mass Video, JapanAnime, and Adult Source Media material it hosts is perfectly legal, but the Trimax anime stuff isn't.


It depends upon in which country and local jurisdiction you are. For Japan's take, see "Obscenity and Article 175 of the Japanese Penal Code: A Short Introduction to Japanese Censorship" (http://redsiglo21.com/eiga9/articulos/obscenity.html).


That depends upon the source. If you are not downloading them from DMM, Pinpai-TV, or (in the case of Makai Kishi Ingrid) DLsite (which does not stream), they are almost certainly pirated copies and therefore illegal.

wow, so just watching them is illegal or just uploading them? that seems extreme. i haven't downloaded anything, simply watched free streamed hentai. i usually watch regular anime on any random site that uploads them. also, can you list which laws, pertaining to my area, i should read up on concerning obscenity, viewing bootleg material, etc?

[Leader Desslock]

wow, so just watching them is illegal or just uploading them?
Both.

can you list which laws, pertaining to my area, i should read up on concerning obscenity, viewing bootleg material, etc?
Given that Anthony Comstock was a New Yorker, laws in your area might well be stricter on some points (http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=obscenity+laws+in+new+york).

[DocWatson]

wow, so just watching them is illegal or just uploading them?
Both—neither is sanctioned by the copyright owners, and thus they are illegal.

Note that you are asking two different questions—what is legal under copyright, and what is legal under obscenity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obscenity) laws. For copyright, see:

• "Japanese Government Considers Strengthening Copyright Law" (http://www.animenation.net/blog/2007/12/21/japanese-government-considers-strengthening-copyright-law/) (Dec 21st 2007)

• "Hey, Answerman!" (http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/answerman/2008-08-15) (Aug 15th 2008)

• "Hey, Answerman!: Thanksgiving Leftovers" (http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/answerman/2010-12-03) (Dec 3rd 2010)

In detail; most of this also applies to streaming video:

• "Legality of Fansubs" (http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/feature/2003-06-08/3) (Jun 8th 2003)

On a similar topic:

• "Ask John: Why Do Companies Selling Bootleg Anime Operate Unchecked?" (http://www.animenation.net/blog/2007/10/31/ask-john-why-do-companies-selling-bootleg-anime-operate-unchecked/) (October 31st, 2007)

As for obscenity, see:

• "Ask John: Is lolicon Illegal in the USA?" (http://www.animenation.net/blog/2006/08/01/ask-john-is-lolicon-still-legal-in-america-now/) (October 17th, 2005)

• "Ask John: Is Lolicon Still Legal In America?" (http://www.animenation.net/blog/2006/01/30/ask-john-is-lolicon-still-legal-in-america/) (January 30th, 2006)

• "Ask John: Is Lolicon Still Legal In America Now?" (http://www.animenation.net/blog/2006/08/01/ask-john-is-lolicon-still-legal-in-america-now/) (August 1st, 2006)

• "Commentaries on Handley's Sentencing for Obscene Manga" (http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/editorial/2010-02-24) (Feb 24th 2010)

Note that the above are modified by 1) the jurisdiction, 2) the skill of your legal team, and 3) the depth of your pocketbook (reference point two).

i haven't downloaded anything, simply watched free streamed hentai. i usually watch regular anime on any random site that uploads them.
Streaming is just a different way of downloading. The basic difference is that you (usually) don't receive a copy to save—but see "Hey, Answerman!: Thanksgiving Leftovers" above.

[bobble]

thanks guys. i guess i'll have to find other sites like hulu to watch anime. i'm guessing this also applies to manga. any good sites to view manga legally?

[Leader Desslock]

any good sites to view manga legally?
If there are, the place to find links to them would be on the publisher's website for any given title.

Anyone else probably doesn't have the license to post the material, quite frankly.

[DocWatson]

thanks guys. i guess i'll have to find other sites like hulu to watch anime.
You're welcome. ^_^ The Mania.con Anime/Manga forums thread "Free Legal Streaming Anime Master List" (http://www.mania.com/aodvb/showthread.php?t=88574) in the Digital Delivery Anime Discussions forum should prove helpful to you.

i'm guessing this also applies to manga. any good sites to view manga legally?
Icarus Publishing, the hentai manga publisher, has its back catalog on Google Books, though only a portion of each book is available at any one time. (See the Icarus blog posts "Icarus sells soul to Google | Honeybee Whispers reviewed" (October 21, 2008) and "Gripes about comics, Google, economy…" (November 4, 2008).) While you won't be able to read entire books, you will be able to get an accurate sample. Just go to Icarus' site and enter the title in the search box; their Webstore link will give you a list of their titles.

See also their AG Digital magazine, which features selected chapters from their books, and which is free if you download it via BitTorrent.

[Madlax]

Are you stating that viewing titles like Magical Lyrical Nanoha in doujinshi is illegal even know it is sold on ebay? It's considered Lolicon but their is legal access to it.

[DocWatson]

Are you stating that viewing titles like Magical Lyrical Nanoha in doujinshi is illegal even know it is sold on ebay? It's considered Lolicon but their is legal access to it.
Unauthorized doujinshi parodies of anime, manga, etc. are illegal, regardless of whether they are sold on eBay or not. (There are a few doujinshi which are drawn by copyright owners of the franchise which the doujin are parodying, but not many.) However, most Japanese companies have a "live and let live" attitude toward doujinshi, as long as certain lines is not crossed. Where those lines are depends on the companies involved.

Edit: EBay cares more about making money than policing bootlegs—see "Ask John: Why Do Companies Selling Bootleg Anime Operate Unchecked?" above.

[bobble]

You're welcome. ^_^ The Mania.con Anime/Manga forums thread "Free Legal Streaming Anime Master List" (http://www.mania.com/aodvb/showthread.php?t=88574) in the Digital Delivery Anime Discussions forum should prove helpful to you.


Icarus Publishing, the hentai manga publisher, has its back catalog on Google Books, though only a portion of each book is available at any one time. (See the Icarus blog posts "Icarus sells soul to Google | Honeybee Whispers reviewed" (October 21, 2008) and "Gripes about comics, Google, economy…" (November 4, 2008).) While you won't be able to read entire books, you will be able to get an accurate sample. Just go to Icarus' site and enter the title in the search box; their Webstore link will give you a list of their titles.

See also their AG Digital magazine, which features selected chapters from their books, and which is free if you download it via BitTorrent.

the only anime shows/mangas i watch/read currently are naruto and bleach, plus other series that already finished like full metal alchemist:brotherhood. i don't think im gonna be able to find a site that offers subbed mangas for free, legally. as for hentai, i think im just gonna avoid it. too much heat these days. when the law gets its act together, maybe then ill go back to it.

[Madlax]

the only anime shows/mangas i watch/read currently are naruto and bleach, plus other series that already finished like full metal alchemist:brotherhood. i don't think im gonna be able to find a site that offers subbed mangas for free, legally. as for hentai, i think im just gonna avoid it. too much heat these days. when the law gets its act together, maybe then ill go back to it.

Personally, I do not think you have much to worry about with Hentai. I, like you was also concerned about the law regarding these issues. It is a safe assumption that the law cannot do anything to enforce this properly without it being spelled out in black and white about any kind of Lolicon material or streaming hentai from sites. Otherwise, the law will have lawsuits of their own dealing with public backlash if their wrong quoting the law properly. If your still unsure. Their is a Lawyer membership fee out their called Pre-Paid Legal. I use their services to argue bills that are wrongfully addressed to me or if I need clarification on the law. It cost about $16.99 per month with no contracts and can be used often. I found their services invaluable and it saved me from getting wrongfully charged in shady deals from AT&T and other reputable businesses that cheated me or tried.

[Madlax]

To be more specific, the service offered to type up a paper signed by the law firm backing me up on my request to the billing company to argue a point for me to be not obligated for services they can not provide, free as a part of my membership. This helped me out a lot. As for hentai taste, I prefer 17 years or older and had questions on lolicon in general. I also try to stay away from it.

[Leader Desslock]

It is a safe assumption that the law cannot do anything to enforce this properly without it being spelled out in black and white about any kind of Lolicon material or streaming hentai from sites.
What amused me about this post (right or wrong) is that it's exactly the opposite of the sentiment normally expressed whenever the legality of lolicon is discussed. Most people cry to the rooftops that the Four Horsemen Of Totalitarian Censorship are descending to take anime/manga away precisely because the law is "vaguely worded" (which it's not). :lol:

Putting that aside, the law is absolutely black and white on the issue of unlicensed distribution of any kind of material. If the site from which you're streaming has not obtained documented (and presumably compensated) permission to distribute the material to end users (via downloads, fileshare, streaming, etc.), then that is a violation of the rights of the copyright holder. Period. No gray area. Black and White. And since we're presumably talking about Japanese copyright holders and American downloaders (this is AN, after all), then both those nations (and most of the UN) are members of treaties to ensure that members of each nation will help enforce the copyrights of members of the other nations.

In short: In terms of Copyright, it's illegal, unless the distributing party has license to distribute from the copyright holder. If your Pay-For-Legal friends are telling you anything different, please send them to see me. ^_^

As far as the loli angle is concerned, that discussion's already taken place, links have been given.

[Madlax]

What amused me about this post (right or wrong) is that it's exactly the opposite of the sentiment normally expressed whenever the legality of lolicon is discussed. Most people cry to the rooftops that the Four Horsemen Of Totalitarian Censorship are descending to take anime/manga away precisely because the law is "vaguely worded" (which it's not). :lol:

Putting that aside, the law is absolutely black and white on the issue of unlicensed distribution of any kind of material. If the site from which you're streaming has not obtained documented (and presumably compensated) permission to distribute the material to end users (via downloads, fileshare, streaming, etc.), then that is a violation of the rights of the copyright holder. Period. No gray area. Black and White. And since we're presumably talking about Japanese copyright holders and American downloaders (this is AN, after all), then both those nations (and most of the UN) are members of treaties to ensure that members of each nation will help enforce the copyrights of members of the other nations.

In short: In terms of Copyright, it's illegal, unless the distributing party has license to distribute from the copyright holder. If your Pay-For-Legal friends are telling you anything different, please send them to see me. ^_^

As far as the loli angle is concerned, that discussion's already taken place, links have been given.

In reference to this issue. Yes I know streaming is illegal. However viewing Lolicon is not.

[Madlax]

In reference to this issue. Yes I know streaming is illegal. However viewing Lolicon is not.

I appologize for not stating clearly what I meant.

[bobble]

Personally, I do not think you have much to worry about with Hentai. I, like you was also concerned about the law regarding these issues. It is a safe assumption that the law cannot do anything to enforce this properly without it being spelled out in black and white about any kind of Lolicon material or streaming hentai from sites. Otherwise, the law will have lawsuits of their own dealing with public backlash if their wrong quoting the law properly. If your still unsure. Their is a Lawyer membership fee out their called Pre-Paid Legal. I use their services to argue bills that are wrongfully addressed to me or if I need clarification on the law. It cost about $16.99 per month with no contracts and can be used often. I found their services invaluable and it saved me from getting wrongfully charged in shady deals from AT&T and other reputable businesses that cheated me or tried.

thats very interesting, thank you. i'll have to check out this legal service you mentioned.

[Soluzar]

In reference to this issue. Yes I know streaming is illegal. However viewing Lolicon is not.
Just be aware that changes to the law might take place at any time. It will always be a hot-button issue. There have already been a few legal saber-rattlings about lolicon material from Japan, but of one thing you can be sure. If you can legally buy it in a store, then you're safe. If it is legal to sell, it is legal to buy.

[Leader Desslock]

In reference to this issue. Yes I know streaming is illegal. However viewing Lolicon is not.
To be a bit more specific, viewing Lolicon might be, or might not, depending on how you view it and how you obtain it.

Viewing lolicon in the privacy of your own home, not in the company of minors, that an acquaintance drew, and which you did not transport across state lines nor in violation of import statutes - that's legal. Viewing it in a public area with knowledge of the bunch of schoolkids looking at it over your shoulder - that wouldn't be legal.

[Madlax]

To be a bit more specific, viewing Lolicon might be, or might not, depending on how you view it and how you obtain it.

Viewing lolicon in the privacy of your own home, not in the company of minors, that an acquaintance drew, and which you did not transport across state lines nor in violation of import statutes - that's legal. Viewing it in a public area with knowledge of the bunch of schoolkids looking at it over your shoulder - that wouldn't be legal.

I agree. However, I do not think a person should view hentai or Lolicon in front of minors. That is just sick to do something like that. <_< Half the hentai I watch I would never let my friends see or my girlfriend. Viewing hentai should be private. If I have kids I would not let them get a hold of this. It would be locked with a key in a combination safe.

[Madlax]

I agree. However, I do not think a person should view hentai or Lolicon in front of minors. That is just sick to do something like that. <_< Half the hentai I watch I would never let my friends see or my girlfriend. Viewing hentai should be private. If I have kids I would not let them get a hold of this. It would be locked with a key in a combination safe.

If minors were to get a hold of watching these titles by themselves by their resources and view them it would be a little difficult to explain to them not to watch it. I'm typically speaking of a 15 year old or older. When I was that age I use to have my other friends pick up hentai for me or at least doujinshi. I slightly understand underage sex because I was exposed to that too. I also entered puberty at 12. I shudder to have this discussion with my future kids in some ways. I may be a little accepting of this behaviour but I know other parents wouldn't. It is all developed on how a person is brought up in life. I was taught not to be ashamed of your sexuallity and the process of how it develops.

[bobble]

i'm still a bit confused.

so i can watch hentai, so long as its from a legal source, right? ok, i got that part. but what about hentai like princess 69, or something else that is outright lolicon? or how about something like bondage game, which sneaks lolicon on you? what about bondage game MINUS the lolicon, as in just the skat, mutilation, and other such depraved acts? streaming from legal sites, of course.

[Soluzar]

So I can watch hentai, so long as its from a legal source, right? OK I got that part. but what about hentai like Princess 69, or something else that is outright lolicon?
I'm no expert on hentai, certainly not on lolicon, so I had to look up Princess 69. Turns out it was released in the US by Kitty Media. I think you'd be safe with anything that got a legally licensed US DVD release.

Someone more expert in legal matters than I might be able to clarify, but I think when you buy a DVD available in reputable online stores like Anime Nation, you can assume there's no problem.

Bondage Game seems to be another Kitty Media title. The same applies.

The real problem is going to arise when you view online or download (or even import DVDs or manga) material which is available in Japan but which has never been released in the US. There are such things as hentai fansubs...

[DocWatson]

So I can watch hentai, so long as its from a legal source, right? OK I got that part. but what about hentai like Princess 69, or something else that is outright lolicon?
I'm no expert on hentai, certainly not on lolicon, so I had to look up Princess 69. Turns out it was released in the US by Kitty Media. I think you'd be safe with anything that got a legally licensed US DVD release.
Especially since Kitty Media is adverse to the depiction of the underage characters, and has in the past edited scenes which involve them out of series which KM has licensed (e.g., Legend of the Pervert).

[DocWatson]

If you can legally buy it in a store, then you're safe. If it is legal to sell, it is legal to buy.
I would note that just because you can buy it in a store does not make the sale
legal—caveat emptor applies.

[Soluzar]

I would note that just because you can buy it in a store does not make the sale
legal—caveat emptor applies.
If you're talking about the kind of store that sells bootleg DVDs then I understand. I should have added "in a reputable chain store". I'm pretty sure you'd agree if the statement was so amended.

[Leader Desslock]

so i can watch hentai, so long as its from a legal source, right? ok, i got that part.
Legal, Reputable Source = Copyright OK = No Copyright Laws Infringed Upon.

That's all that part means, really. It says absolutely nothing concrete about the content itself. The "loli/child porn" stuff is relative.

but what about hentai like princess 69, or something else that is outright lolicon?
There are degrees of lolicon. If I simply show an adult (Mr. Kimura, from Azumanga Daioh) having lustful thoughts about an underage girl (poor Kaorin), that might be classified as loli, but it's not a graphic depiction of a minor engaged in explicit sexual activity. As such, it won't fall afoul of things like the loose Federal definition of obscene material. If another title (like Bondage Game, which I haven't seen so I don't know) shows graphic depictions of minors engaged in explicit sexual activity, produced in the prurient interest (Read: "made to wank to"), then... that might well have additional restrictions, depending on where you live and how you view it.

...what about bondage game MINUS the lolicon, as in just the skat, mutilation, and other such depraved acts?
Mere depravity is not illegal. Scat, mutilation and other acts are perfectly legal to watch.


If that's still confusing to you, remember the following phrase: "DON'T WATCH KIDS HAVING SEX".

So long as you abide by that rule, you should be fine.

[Madlax]

Legal, Reputable Source = Copyright OK = No Copyright Laws Infringed Upon.

That's all that part means, really. It says absolutely nothing concrete about the content itself. The "loli/child porn" stuff is relative.


There are degrees of lolicon. If I simply show an adult (Mr. Kimura, from Azumanga Daioh) having lustful thoughts about an underage girl (poor Kaorin), that might be classified as loli, but it's not a graphic depiction of a minor engaged in explicit sexual activity. As such, it won't fall afoul of things like the loose Federal definition of obscene material. If another title (like Bondage Game, which I haven't seen so I don't know) shows graphic depictions of minors engaged in explicit sexual activity, produced in the prurient interest (Read: "made to wank to"), then... that might well have additional restrictions, depending on where you live and how you view it.


Mere depravity is not illegal. Scat, mutilation and other acts are perfectly legal to watch.


If that's still confusing to you, remember the following phrase: "DON'T WATCH KIDS HAVING SEX".

So long as you abide by that rule, you should be fine.

Under your last statement "DON'T WATCH KIDS HAVING SEX" would eliminate a lot of hentai US titles out their as well. Example, Kitty title: Sexual Pursuit. This situation can not be avoided if a person is trying to stay within a targetted age group to relate on some level. It would be ideal to stay with cougar titles. It will be limiting if that is what your referring to?

[Leader Desslock]

Under your last statement "DON'T WATCH KIDS HAVING SEX" would eliminate a lot of hentai US titles out their as well. Example, Kitty title: Sexual Pursuit.
Never heard of it.

<looks up title>

Plot Summary: When a game orders you to do something otherwise you won't do with your mom things get complicated, but even worse when your sister gets involved in that game.

:| ... :huh: ... :O ... >_< ... :x

Christ on a CRUTCH, why the **** would anyone watch that?!? GodsDAMN, that's wrong.

[Madlax]

Never heard of it.

<looks up title>

Plot Summary: When a game orders you to do something otherwise you won't do with your mom things get complicated, but even worse when your sister gets involved in that game.

:| ... :huh: ... :O ... >_< ... :x

Christ on a CRUTCH, why the **** would anyone watch that?!? GodsDAMN, that's wrong.

I'm saying unless a person would actually rent or view a title they want it can be deceiving and can limit people. I'm just giving an example. Most hentai have depiction of coming of age kids or just plain kids. If the person renting is 18 they would want to rent something closer to the 18 age range.

[Madlax]

I'm saying unless a person would actually rent or view a title they want it can be deceiving and can limit people. I'm just giving an example. Most hentai have depiction of coming of age kids or just plain kids. If the person renting is 18 they would want to rent something closer to the 18 age range.

I agree I picked a poor title.

[Madlax]

Never heard of it.

<looks up title>

Plot Summary: When a game orders you to do something otherwise you won't do with your mom things get complicated, but even worse when your sister gets involved in that game.

:| ... :huh: ... :O ... >_< ... :x

Christ on a CRUTCH, why the **** would anyone watch that?!? GodsDAMN, that's wrong.

Your right, now that I looked at the title details. I appologize, that was nasty. I referenced the wrong title and producer. I was trying to pick a general title that has kids about the 18 range but this was completely different.

[bobble]

Legal, Reputable Source = Copyright OK = No Copyright Laws Infringed Upon.

That's all that part means, really. It says absolutely nothing concrete about the content itself. The "loli/child porn" stuff is relative.


There are degrees of lolicon. If I simply show an adult (Mr. Kimura, from Azumanga Daioh) having lustful thoughts about an underage girl (poor Kaorin), that might be classified as loli, but it's not a graphic depiction of a minor engaged in explicit sexual activity. As such, it won't fall afoul of things like the loose Federal definition of obscene material. If another title (like Bondage Game, which I haven't seen so I don't know) shows graphic depictions of minors engaged in explicit sexual activity, produced in the prurient interest (Read: "made to wank to"), then... that might well have additional restrictions, depending on where you live and how you view it.


Mere depravity is not illegal. Scat, mutilation and other acts are perfectly legal to watch.


If that's still confusing to you, remember the following phrase: "DON'T WATCH KIDS HAVING SEX".

So long as you abide by that rule, you should be fine.

when i was watching bondage game i wasn't expecting the lolicon. it completely snuck up on me. i have no interest in lolicon.

can someone make a list of hentai that has absolutely no lolicon/shotacon? or the opposite list of hentai that does have it?

[Leader Desslock]

Your right, now that I looked at the title details. I appologize, that was nasty. I referenced the wrong title and producer. I was trying to pick a general title that has kids about the 18 range but this was completely different.
No worries. If I didn't have thick enough skin to survive whatever the internet could throw at me, I wouldn't be here. ^_^

[Soluzar]

Legal, Reputable Source = Copyright OK = No Copyright Laws Infringed Upon.

That's all that part means, really. It says absolutely nothing concrete about the content itself. The "loli/child porn" stuff is relative.
Even so... if it is licensed for American distribution by one of the major companies like Kitty Media or whoever, don't ya think that makes it a safe prospect? They wouldn't publish it if they thought there was a chance it could get them in trouble.

[KatayokuのTenshi]

and which you did not transport across state

Why does that matter? Does it matter even if it's legal in both states?

I would note that just because you can buy it in a store does not make the sale
legal—caveat emptor applies.

I don't think that's what caveat emptor means...

[Leader Desslock]

Even so... if it is licensed for American distribution by one of the major companies like Kitty Media or whoever, don't ya think that makes it a safe prospect? They wouldn't publish it if they thought there was a chance it could get them in trouble.
Generally speaking, yes. 99.9% of the time, yes.

If a company licensed the title for North American distribution, then they clearly think there are enough places in North America (including the US) in which they can sell the title. So the title probably won't run afoul of federal obscenity statutes. It might still violate local obscenity statutes, however.

Why does that matter? Does it matter even if it's legal in both states?
Ask Chris Handley. :lol:

The federal government has additional powers regarding interstate commerce in the US, is why I mentioned that bit. And it's still possible to run afoul of interstate commerce regulations even if the material is legal in both states.

[DocWatson]

I would note that just because you can buy it in a store does not make the sale
legal—caveat emptor applies.

I don't think that's what caveat emptor means...
I was referring to the literal meaning (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/caveat%20emptor): "let the buyer beware"—as in, of bootlegs (http://www.otakunews.com/piratefaq.php).

::::::

Madlax and bobble: Please don't quote (large) posts in their entirety just to give a reply to a portion of them—trim them (http://www.enabling.org/ia/celiac/netiquett.html#TRIM) and quote selectively (http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?TrimYourPosts).

[Madlax]

I was referring to the literal meaning (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/caveat%20emptor): "let the buyer beware"—as in, of bootlegs (http://www.otakunews.com/piratefaq.php).

::::::

Madlax and bobble: Please don't quote (large) posts in their entirety just to give a reply to a portion of them—trim them (http://www.enabling.org/ia/celiac/netiquett.html#TRIM) and quote selectively (http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?TrimYourPosts).

I understand, I'll try to eliminate the filler part of the quote. Have a happy holiday!

[bobble]

hey Leader Desslock, you seem to be quite knowledgeable about law. is there any source you use, or know of that helps consolidate and explain all these things?

and to anyone with an answer: are people in the US persecuted for watching/reading streamed anime/hentai/manga for free from random sources? is the legality of it even something to worry about? i don't mind giving up hentai too much, but anime and manga are gonna be tough.

[Leader Desslock]

hey Leader Desslock, you seem to be quite knowledgeable about law. is there any source you use, or know of that helps consolidate and explain all these things?
Off the top of my head, no.

and to anyone with an answer: are people in the US persecuted for watching/reading streamed anime/hentai/manga for free from random sources?
If you mean "for copyright infringement", then... only the party that holds the copyright (or his legal representative) can bring a civil suit for violating copyrights in a US courtroom. Can it happen? Absolutely. But casual end-users usually go untouched, and even distributors of such material only receive Cease And Desist orders.

... is the legality of it even something to worry about?
That would be an individual decision on your part. It's illegal, and if you're pulling this stuff across the net (as opposed to burning a rented DVD from Netflix, say) then there is a potential trail leading from the source to your machine. Do you care? Should you? That's up to you.