Virginie Ledoyen - L'Eau Froide

thefaceman32 · **Posted:** Fri May 15, 2009 10:10 pm

Someone stated this in an earlier post

"Because the CNDb users that you're harrassing are only LINKING to external content, not hosting it themselves, whereas you are HOSTING UNDERAGE CONTENT...""

1. I did not know that Vidman was the owner of these sites
2. I suspect that if you are "linking" to a site you may not be technically "hosting the image" but you are aiding and abetting in the actions of disemination of such content
3. I would not characterize Vidman's posts in this thread as "harassing" as Vidman is appreciating those who are pointing out the fact that he was not aware of such content on the site and removed them to ensure that he was following a standard that most people appreciate

coolio87p · **Posted:** Fri May 15, 2009 10:11 pm

Why's this even being argued? How do you think movies like the Hole and American Beauty got released?

spanker · **Posted:** Fri May 15, 2009 10:34 pm

thefaceman32 wrote:

spanker wrote:

The actual law in most countries

And I notice you seem to be purposefully ignoring what I said about private forums

Really. I'd have to see evidence of that to believe that "definition to be true" I suspect that you have incorrectly paraphrased the law

As coolio87p pointed out the fact Americian Beauty and The Hole were released and which are available on Amazon prove my definition

And Amazon would take no risks .

Maybe · **Posted:** Mon May 18, 2009 2:39 pm

spanker wrote:

Speaker2Animals wrote:

Actually, I was specifically thinking of:

Underage refers to doing sex scenes

Just being naked is not underage

Well if you don't understand that I don't know how I can help you since that is one of the most straightforward sentences I wrote .

spanker wrote:

It's just sloppy language

I understood ortornot fine. You're the only one using sloppy language, spanker.

Oh and vidman =

spanker · **Posted:** Mon May 18, 2009 3:00 pm

Maybe wrote:

spanker wrote:

It's just sloppy language

I understood ortornot fine. You're the only one using sloppy language, spanker.

Yes I'm the one posting a nonsense statement like

Quote:

I'll not post them here cause she was underage obviously, but its of course a legal movie and all

Care to tell me your meaning of that sentence then ?

Maybe · **Posted:** Tue May 19, 2009 6:43 am

spanker wrote:

Care to tell me your meaning of that sentence then ?

He won't post the video due to the reason he stated, but clarified that the former was not due to the latter.

spanker · **Posted:** Tue May 19, 2009 11:57 am

Maybe wrote:

spanker wrote:

Care to tell me your meaning of that sentence then ?

He won't post the video due to the reason he stated, but clarified that the former was not due to the latter.

So your meaning of it is He won't post the video because she's underage but the underage status of her doesn't arise from the movie since it is a legal movie

which just brings us back to the question I first asked him

DuncanDonuts · **Posted:** Tue May 19, 2009 12:11 pm

spanker wrote:

So your meaning of it is He won't post the video because she's underage but the underage status of her doesn't arise from the movie since it is a legal movie

which just brings us back to the question I first asked him

in the clip he's talking about she's 14 (iirc).

what he said was the movie is legal (which it is), but he felt it would be inappropriate (or against the forum rules) to post a clip of a nude 14 year old.

fyi the clip he's talking about is already on this forum anyway..

Maybe · **Posted:** Tue May 19, 2009 12:57 pm

spanker wrote:

which just brings us back to the question I first asked him

This one?

spanker wrote:

Well she can't have been obviously underage since then the movie would actually be illegal

Yes she is obviously underage, and no, that does not make the movie illegal.

I think you need some sleep, pal.

spanker · **Posted:** Tue May 19, 2009 1:22 pm

Maybe wrote:

spanker wrote:

which just brings us back to the question I first asked him

This one?

spanker wrote:

Well she can't have been obviously underage since then the movie would actually be illegal

Yes she is obviously underage, and no, that does not make the movie illegal.

Yes it does given what underage means

Maybe wrote:

I think you need some sleep, pal.

Any reason you are making the assumption I'm in a particular time zone .

DuncanDonuts · **Posted:** Tue May 19, 2009 1:32 pm

what exactly is your argument? movies with nude people under the age of 16/18/21 are not by definition illegal (fact). if you object to clips being posted here of people under the age of 16/18/21 then fair enough, start a new thread about it, contact the mods, flag the posts ..contact the police, i don't know, just please stop trashing up the forum with pedantic arguments.

spanker · **Posted:** Tue May 19, 2009 2:07 pm

DuncanDonuts wrote:

what exactly is your argument? movies with nude people under the age of 16/18/21 are not by definition illegal (fact).

You seem to understand what I'm saying there .

DuncanDonuts wrote:

if you object to clips being posted here of people under the age of 16/18/21 then fair enough, start a new thread about it, contact the mods, flag the posts ..contact the police, i don't know, just please stop trashing up the forum with pedantic arguments.

but seem to undermine yourself here especially with "contact the police" bit

DuncanDonuts · **Posted:** Tue May 19, 2009 2:26 pm

you didn't answer the question. what exactly is your argument? ..it's just pedantism? ..with someone who has already admitted that english isn't their first language?