Do you think /l/ will ever be revived?
>>515690
Is there a version of this movie in Japanese with English subtitles? Vanellope has a very sexy Japanese voice. And yes I've seen it in English already.
No, it was a legal issue then and it would be a legal issue clumped with a massive PR disaster now.
>>515695
I haven't been able to find a complete Japanese dub, no.
>>515697
>it was a legal issue
Really? Huh, didn't know that. I thought it just had something to do with driving away potential advertisers.
>>515690
When we aren't completely understaffed, maybe.
>>515697
It wasn't a legal issue. Loli is legal under federal US law and California law.
It was removed due to spam of real CP and because moot is a faggot. Moderation on old 4chan was also poor in comparison to now.
If it was an issue under US law, then 8ch would've been nuked long ago.
>>515723
>California
>>515725
4chan's servers are currently hosted in Los Angeles, so yeah, California.
https://whois.icann.org/en/lookup?name=4chan.org
I want a straight shota board.
>>515772
Just make it a shota board you picky faggot
>>515803
But then the gross gay stuff would be mixed with the good straight stuff
>>515772
Wasn't there actually a shota board at one point?
>>516001
Yes.
>>515690
Maybe if not4chan.org comes back.
I doubt we could talk Hirohito into it. IMO they should just change the rules so loli will be allowed on /h/.
moot hated it when he made it and moot hated it when he deleted it. Hirohito isn't fond of pedos either and prefers to tread on the safe side of the law. Your guess.
>>515690
I hope not. If anything is right in this world, loli will be allowed on /e/, /d/ and /h/ and that will be it, there's no need for a loli board.
>>517547
>to tread on the safe side of the law
The law doesn't criminalize it.
>b-but obscenity laws per US state
Not a federal law and, by definition of the law, LITERALLY ANYTHING can be deemed "obscene".
>>516967
Unfortunately for you, now normalfags like CP.
t. active facebook user
>>517568
What the fuck does the word "safe" mean to you? Loli is questionable and risky because the law isn't so clear cut everywhere.
>>515690
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1466A
>>515690
no because that's a horrible idea.
>watch loli porn
>hmm loli isn't working for me anymore
>watch child porn
>hmm child porn isn't working for me anymore
>rape children
loli doesn't curb peoples' pedo tendencies, it only exacerbates it. if you're sexually attracted to children, you need to check yourself into a clinic right now before you do irrepairable damage to the people around you.
>>518716
>In 2002 the United States Supreme Court ruled in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition that the Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 (CPPA) was facially invalid in prohibiting virtual or cartoon child pornography. The basis for the ruling was that the CPPA made unlawful some forms of protected First Amendment speech, banning depictions of sex between children even if not obscene and not involving real child victims. Under New York v. Ferber, if the depiction is of real child abuse or a real child victim, as a result of photographing a live performance, for instance, then it is not protected speech. Under Miller v. California, obscene speech is likewise excluded from First Amendment protection. The CPPA made all virtual child sex depictions illegal without regard to whether the speech was protected or not, so that part of the statute was struck down as facially invalid.
>>518720
>watch hentai
>hmm 2D isn't working for me anymore
>watch normal porn
>hmm normal porn isn't working for me anymore
>rape women
It's sad how every single person on the world becomes like this, isn't it.
>>518726
>>518729
Why is PIDF so bad at understanding the law? What >>518716 linked was the statute passed after Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition that added (1B) and (2B) to address
>The CPPA made all virtual child sex depictions illegal without regard to whether the speech was protected or not
SCOTUS has yet to rule on the new version.
>>518737
Except you can have consensual sex with a woman.
You can't have consensual sex with a child. It's always rape no matter what.
>>518739
>SCOTUS has yet to rule on the new version.
But they already did. Parts of the PROTECT Act are unconstitutional under US federal law and it boils down to each state's absurd "obscenity" laws.
Under US federal law and California law (where 4chan servers are hosted), lolicon is 100% legal.
>In November 2011, Joseph Audette, a 30-year-old computer network administrator from Surry, Maine, was arrested after his username was linked to child pornography sites. A search inside Audette's home did not result in any real child pornography, but did result in the findings of "anime child pornography". Much unlike previous cases (and likely due to the results of the Handley ruling), the charges were quickly dismissed under Maine law and dropped under federal law.[73]
>>518743
Holy shit, do you pedos just make up what you think the law should be and pretend that's what happened?
>Handley ruling
Threw out only one of two nearly equivalent prohibitions. Also not SCOTUS, I have no idea why you think they've ruled on this.
>>518746
Where did I say that SCOTUS ruled on Handley? I didn't, I was merely giving an example of how federal law dropped charges related to freaking drawings.
>Holy shit, do you pedos just make up what you think the law should be and pretend that's what happened?
The irony is astounding. The law clearly criminalizes content that is "obscene" or "lacks any serious value", which, by definition, is subjective. Applications of the law in real cases clearly show that it basically depends on what each state considers "obscene".
Also, loli is already allowed on /b/.
>>515723
More importantly, it's extremely illegal in Australia so it could potentially reduce Australia's presence on this site.
Win/win.
