-_-

[saviourseph]

Does this mean owning a copy of Nevermind is now a child sex offense?

I checked mine and turns out they're one of the ones censoring - checked the page and "404", despite WP not using a stock 404 page with missing articles. Just in case it turns out they're a sub-company of Virgin I've installed Dephormation; - don't want them spying on me as well as nannying me.

ETA - apparently they're part of Opal, not Virgin (just checked with Geotool), but Phorm protection is still a good idea nonetheless.

Comments

[wrongly-amused.livejournal.com]

Is the little girl shot provocatively? Otherwise, I'd argue it's just a naked kid. Nudity != sexual.

[paulnolan.livejournal.com]

Nope; not provocative - just another point in the "demonise all nudity" crusade.

(besides, if the album had had actual CP on the coverart it wouldn't've even made it to the shelves, let alone been around as long as it has).

[paulnolan.livejournal.com]

Update: been reading, and apparently intent now has sod-all to do with legality; pics of naked children are verboten no matter what.*

Doesn't give them the right to stealth censor the internet though; this is the UK, not China.

*With the result that my mum (an most others) could be charged with owning "indecent images of childen" (i.e. baby photos) and put on the sex offenders register. Barmy. -_-;;

...I hate this country.