Country restrictions

[Helme]

I have noticed there are some country restrictions and in some countries some of the girls are impossible to see?
Why it it like that?
I think everyone who wants can use vpn service and with it still can be seen. It's an ask from models or agencies?

[pastaga]

Maybe for models who come from countries where doing porn is prohibited ?

[xmal-fuckland]

probably a case that the legal responsibility is on the distributor not to make certain content available in certain countries.

if you choose to circumvent that prohibition via a vpn or proxy, that is your choice.

best policy is to use a proxy (cyberghost good i find) all the time, and give small-minded censorious governments (and the bigots who elect them) the finger. and make the effort to vote (and protest) against them whenever you get the opportunity.

'one has to multiply thoughts to the point where there aren't enough policemen to control them' (stanislav lec).

[danthefan73]

probably a case that the legal responsibility is on the distributor not to make certain content available in certain countries.

if you choose to circumvent that prohibition via a vpn or proxy, that is your choice.

best policy is to use a proxy (cyberghost good i find) all the time, and give small-minded censorious governments (and the bigots who elect them) the finger. and make the effort to vote (and protest) against them whenever you get the opportunity.

'one has to multiply thoughts to the point where there aren't enough policemen to control them' (stanislav lec).

I think it's important to point out that there is always some risk in breaking the rules. As recent revelations from Snowden have revealed, even democratic governments are indiscriminately spying on their citizens and collecting a lot of information that can be used against them.

You can end up on some secret government list that might bar you from travel or from holding government jobs. Or they can keep you file, until they want something from you, like plead guilty to some crime for example. They can threaten you with many years in jail, if you don't plead guilty. Because they can charge you with hundreds or thousands of crimes for which they would have evidence in their file on you.

There is an advantage for the government to criminalize things that people commonly do. Because then virtually everybody is a law-breaker. Which means that nobody has any rights. The government can threaten you with jail, whenever they want something from you.

That's the cost of breaking the laws and the rules that you don't agree with.

[xmal-fuckland]

probably a case that the legal responsibility is on the distributor not to make certain content available in certain countries.

if you choose to circumvent that prohibition via a vpn or proxy, that is your choice.

best policy is to use a proxy (cyberghost good i find) all the time, and give small-minded censorious governments (and the bigots who elect them) the finger. and make the effort to vote (and protest) against them whenever you get the opportunity.

'one has to multiply thoughts to the point where there aren't enough policemen to control them' (stanislav lec).

I think it's important to point out that there is always some risk in breaking the rules. As recent revelations from Snowden have revealed, even democratic governments are indiscriminately spying on their citizens and collecting a lot of information that can be used against them.

You can end up on some secret government list that might bar you from travel or from holding government jobs. Or they can keep you file, until they want something from you, like plead guilty to some crime for example. They can threaten you with many years in jail, if you don't plead guilty. Because they can charge you with hundreds or thousands of crimes for which they would have evidence in their file on you.

There is an advantage for the government to criminalize things that people commonly do. Because then virtually everybody is a law-breaker. Which means that nobody has any rights. The government can threaten you with jail, whenever they want something from you.

That's the cost of breaking the laws and the rules that you don't agree with.

re "There is an advantage for the government to criminalize things that people commonly do. Because then virtually everybody is a law-breaker. Which means that nobody has any rights. The government can threaten you with jail, whenever they want something from you."

totally agree with you, but that is already the reality. an unavoidable 'given'. to which the only sane and spirited reply is 'I'd rather die on my feet, than live on my knees.' (emiliano zapata).

as the lec quote i gave states ('one has to multiply thoughts to the point where there aren't enough policemen to control them'), the more stupid and nonsensical laws are challenged, the more likely it is that their unfairness and lack of relevance/validity will be recognised by the public and lead to their abandonment. see how laws on discrimination against colour, gender and sexuality have changed within our lifetimes.
i'm not a dope-smoker but this is a good example of how the principle works in practice.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/apr/20/more-than-50-arrested-at-pro-cannabis-rally-in-london
many others abound for far more noble causes, but this is a recent local example.

if a law is bullshit, break it en masse, repeatedly and publicly, to call it into contempt. your duty if that is what you really believe in and you have any self-respect.
ultimately you get the authority you deserve. if you show fear, weakness and over-compliance 'they' will take advantage.

i admire snowden, manning, assange, et al. more courage and integrity than 99.9% of humanity put together.
corrupt authority fears the truth more than any weapon. hence them collectively shitting themselves over wikileaks.

it's not for me to tell someone to break the law or not to, it's their personal choice (as i said in my post). do what you want.

'adventure without risk is disneyland' (douglas coupland).