But would it not be just as weird, creepy, and taboo for one to do it with non-nude and therefore non-pornographic material? Would pictures of feet being passed around not be just as weird but also not covered under this law?
Is there? According the the law the issue is that he took the scenes as pornographic when they weren’t. Not that he organized and posted the scenes in the first place.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
There’s a fundamental difference between doing that and publicizing something though.
But would it not be just as weird, creepy, and taboo for one to do it with non-nude and therefore non-pornographic material? Would pictures of feet being passed around not be just as weird but also not covered under this law?
Is there? According the the law the issue is that he took the scenes as pornographic when they weren’t. Not that he organized and posted the scenes in the first place.