This really comes down to the defending party more than anyone else. If someone is accused of purchasing sexual actions, the implication of the crime is that they paid the sex worker for active enagement in said action. - ThreadSky

About ThreadSky

maevequinzley.bsky.social • 4 days ago

This really comes down to the defending party more than anyone else.

If someone is accused of purchasing sexual actions, the implication of the crime is that they paid the sex worker for active enagement in said action.

Comments

maevequinzley.bsky.social•4 days ago

The accused must then argue that they didn't pay the sex worker, but the service host.

This would be hard to argue because the definitive implication is that they paid the sex worker for the action.

maevequinzley.bsky.social•4 days ago

But it wouldn't be impossible to argue because the exchange of compensation for the action can only happen because of the service host, or possibly the payment processor.

In which case, the service host is now implicated in a prostitution case.

maevequinzley.bsky.social•4 days ago

And that's never going to go the way the prosecutors want because there's no way a big site like OF is going to fold in a case where they're accused of something that heavy.

So the most likely scenario is that if you play the cards right, this new law isn't going to hold up in court.

maevequinzley.bsky.social•4 days ago

I don't really know how to end this rant, but I think this proves just badly written this law is.

Posting Rules

Be respectful to others
No spam or self-promotion
Stay on topic
Follow Bluesky's terms of service

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply