Civitai Blocking Access to the United Kingdom

[Nexvinco]

Just did a quick check and I can still access Civitai through a VPN. I just set it to the US and boom, access.

 

[Icarus Media]

Icarus Media you're required.

Petitions are good, and the dev forum has been floating the idea, the issue is whether a current government would consider it, they seem to be hell bent on annoying the public and disregarding anything they may want at the moment.

 

[SkyRebel]

UK going 1984

 

[TheNowhereWolf]

Can't see the devs pages with all their uploaded games, only individual game pages are working, for now anyway.

 

[rk-47]

Rule 34 seemingly restricted in the UK too, a message saying "ur gov is dumb" appears

 

[ebersteenn]

Rule 34 is indeed now blocked in the UK. Wonder how long it will take for other sites to also be restricted. Annoying cause my VPN recently expired and I don't really make much use of it to justify another subscription.

 

[ouch2020]

Unless that someone is, like it's the case here, a company that focus on providing to websites the external covering for such compliance. It obviously just present an overview, but it's already a strong enough base to know if it is or not doable in your case.

I know it was long , but read again my post.

I did not say they cannot do it or that it cannot be considered a "business cost", only that they cannot just rely on what others says in random web sites, even if those "others" are lawyers, to decide if and how they can become compliant with the new UK rules.

An overview is enough for us making generic comments, not for someone to analyse a business case - been there, done that.
Given the risk of penalisation, that in this case is not even just economic but criminal, a company needs to do its own due diligence evaluation, either creating the capability inside, or paying someone to make a real assessment, and not only a legal one but also one on the technical impact and costs, for them.

Civitai has decided that the "business" (directly or indirectly, e.g. though advertising revenue) they get from UK is not worth the investment and complexity of dealing with this.

I said it, creation, and selling, of AI generated p*d*shit porn. I found it back, and yeah, it was in the UK. There's others, like this guy in Quebec, or that student in Illinois, but they happened latter.

Seen the article date, honestly, I remember the case I was mentioning was last year, I do not remember the month. But then again, it is different, even just because you are talking about adults "selling" pornographic content, included with children - that was not the type of case I was referring to, it was very very different.

This is pervert/sick behavior, not p*d*shit porn.

There is a number of "kinks" I do not like even in computer games, and even some that I play myself in computer game I could never do in real life because my conscience would not allow me, independently from the legality (more than one would be actually fully legal if done with a willing partner), so I tend to try to avoid certain expressions, unless I am joking.

At the same time, we are on a web site and forum where most of the content would be classified as porn, and while they may themselves have big collections of all kind of "stuff" , most people if you asked in a kind of "public" way would say the simple fact we are registered on this web site means we are all perverts.

You yourself wrote "not p*d*shit porno", but actually, many people consider "p*d*shit porno" as perverted sick (to use your words) stuff, and if it is real, depending also on what I saw and I if I did keep a old mind I could even come out with that kind of expression myself - on a computer game or a japanese hentai manga, depending on the content and story, I can have little or no problem (depending how it is), because it is not real.

If you search seriously you'll easily find a hundred cases, and it's just the tip of the iceberg.

Your reaction seems like you were shocked because you just discovered now that there are older people/grown up people who try to have (and have, in some case) for real sex with 12yo :-(, or people who have sex with animals (I mean in real life, not in games or ), or there are people like serial killers (in reality not all, but for a number there there is a sexual link).

For the part about sex with what we consider under the age of full legal rights (not to confuse with age of consent), I suggest you do not look at history, even just of the last century and including UK (if, as I seem to understand, you are from UK), you could have some bad suprises .

For the animals, well, there are jokes about sheeps and sheperds (and I don't mean figuratively like priests, I mean real ones), but they are not only jokes, if one think about the past and living conditions of shepards. But since something suggest you may be a woman, before you go with "these men", actually there are for real women who enjoy a bit too much the company of "mankind's best friend", aka the dog.
In real life I find even just the idea of the first on the disgusting side, but, assuming the woman is willing and enjoying it, I still think they should not allow it, as a matter of animal welfare protection - though I am not an animal activist or something like that, and I eat meat.

Because it's what they are, period.

First of all, I was not referring to UK, but to another country, so, there actually the public "sex offender registry" which at some point I remembered existed in UK, does not exist - though I admit my wording may uninentionally have been confusing, I tried to use expressions that could easily translate to a UK context, but it was probably a mistake, sorry for that.

From the other side, to make it short, either you have not read well my post, again either due to lenght or because you felt offended by something in it, or you need to really review your notions about normal development, specifically adolescence.

To quote UK NHS (so, not some F95 perverts ) " Sexual feelings, attractions, fantasies and desires affect virtually all people from (at least) puberty onwards. The average age of puberty for girls in the UK is 12 to 13, 13 to 14 for boys. In common with other aspects of development, the age at which puberty occurs varies widely from person to person. It is normal for the onset of puberty in different individuals to start as young as 8 or to be delayed until 16 or 17. "
It is not only in UK, it is not about passport, is about being humans.

A recent article I saw by chance indicated that according to some survey, in USA 44% of people in age range 15-19 had already sex with someone of the opposite sex, and 10% already had anal. They interviewed people at that age, but the "had already" means they could have had it even younger.
A scientific paper about women in Scandinavia aged 18-45 said " Women in the most recent birth cohort had sexual debut at the lowest age, and were most likely to have sexual debut before the legal age of consent. Proportions with debut age ≤14 years among women born 1989-1994 vs 1971-1976, odds ratio (95% confidence interval) were: 18.4% vs 10.9%, 1.95 (1.74-2.18) in Denmark, 12.9% vs 6.3%, 2.38 (2.01-2.82) in Norway, 17.8% vs 11.4%, 1.75 (1.55-1.98) in Sweden. "
For UK, "The average age of sexual debut in the UK is 16 – 17. While most young people nowadays have not had sexual intercourse by the time they turn sixteen, between a third and half have."
The second part of the phrase says that 33-50% have had full sex before 16, if do your math, you will see that to make the average 16-17, if 33-50% of them had an age below 16, it means a number of them did not do it at 16years minus one day :-D.

Considering the average life span nowadays, in real life I am against someboy 12, 13, 14 or even 15 or having full sex (and I know myself someone who did it at 17, and ended up creating a judicial mess lasting more than a decade, because the girl was 18, the boy wasn't, she got pregnant, and in that country it that meant social service and courts got in).
And if they have any real experience in that direction, should be with someone same age, not with a 30, 40 or plus person, because it is not true that the "lolita" (which in reality takes the initiative) type cannot exist in reality, but I tend to see anything of that type as "older one exploits younger one".

But again, in that case, it was 14yo fantasizing about girls the same age, which is the most natural thing in the World.

True, at my time (when I was around that age, and older) there was no so-called "generative AI" to visualise it, and myself I was a bit of a romantic. Also true that they shared it with others, so should be punished harshly because it was not a small stupidity - but it was not a 40 years old taking porno pictures of a ten years old kid and distributing them around, it should not be treated in the same way.

Not everywhere. Most of the time justice take the context into account, and therefore count the willingness and age of the other person in consideration.

It is entirely possible, because e.g. there are countries where people can legally marry at 13, and if they did not finally change it, California had the "funny" rule that sex below 18 falls under criminal law even if they are both below 18, but if they were married it could be done at age 13 (which means that somehow people could legally marry at 13, though I think it was a residual of some XIX century provision made for Mormons) - but I would like to know which countries you are referring to, because as far as I know, it is far from being "most of the time" in Europe, America and Oceania (Asia I know only something about some country, Africa even less, though I know some countries there have an age of consent towards the lower side, while others apply are in part .
Especially the part about "age and willingness", exactly because in a way age goes agains willingness, i.e. consent below a certain age is considered null, unless it is a country where substantially once there is age of consent, the consent is considered absolute.
I think now (already from some years) the law is different, but many years ago I remember there was the problem of sexual tourism to Thailand exactly because there it was legally acceptable - one country in Europe came to the point of making a law that indicated people could be prosecuted for having done abroad sexual activity that would have been criminal in that country (sex with underage, age of consent being 16 and then 14 in that country) in another country, especially and explicitly because they decided there was too much "sexual tourism" to Thailand.
And till few years ago, in Switzerland, since the age of consent was 16 and prostitution was legal, it was also legal to become a prostitute at age 16 - they did a referendum to change the law and raise the prostitution age to 18, in order to align it with some UN convention they had signed.

It's only when the photo are public (see Tumblr) that it will actually considered as p*d*shit.

Not in most countries, honestly this is the first time I hear something like this. In most countries if it is considered p*d* stuff (why are you writing it like this, afraid it will be found by a search engine ?), it is considered as such independently from whether it is public, made available to others, or you have it on your disk.
And willingness, or "willingness" is irrelevant, exactly because being p*d* means it is someone that is too young to give a valid consent.

Not in the UK, or the USA, that rely on Common Law; in short, lawmakers define the canvas, and then let judges define what will be the Law.

I am fully aware of the "common law" approach, for reasons I do not enter into now.
As a matter of fact, the "common law" for UK and USA in reality is rooted in the class system of medieval (and not only) England - the "Magna Charta" that is not a constitution (if you feel incensed in your national pride, I suggest you check both the definition of the constitution and what actually means "constituere", "constiution" comes from that, Latin), and in which the nobles limited the power of the king, but contrary to some Hollywood movie, not for all the people, but for the nobles.
As a matter of fact, the two countries have a "general common law" approach, but in reality developed quite a different system, also because the USA have a Constitution.

For your information, the latest version (it was a proposal) of a USA law was about a "age verification" which is just a question saying "yes I am of legal age" or something like Renderosity making you click on "show me content", and for the "fake porn" or anything like that, it was about making a specific crime the fact of making fake videos purpoting to represent a real person where is not and without their consent.
But in that there was nothing about the tools themselves and any kind of information that could allow to generate that type of content being forbidden, like instead is present in the new UK law.

I guess somebody (tech people, big money business) made them understand in principle the same software and hardware used to generate e.g. special effects for Hollywood or generate videogame contents or recreate partially damaged and scale up images, can potentially be trained, and used, to create that type of content.
The investment of time (and money for hardware, and even more electricity) can be very reasonable or very big depending on a number of factors, but if people are willing to do it, they can.
So, the only way to be really sure that the law is effective against that, is to start policing every hard disk and hardware sell, to check what all those potential perverts out there with they powerful NVIDIA GPUs are doing and what they have on their HD :-D.

It reminds me of an old discussion about some "bright" politician asking why they could not simply prohibit the active principle in some illegal drugs, and then experts having to point out that e.g. opioids are used in tons of medicinals from coughing syrups (veeeeery liiiiiiight) to pain killers, benzodiazepines are used in useful medicinals (and yes, one is also used as a "rape drug", but the simplest to get, is something you can buy in any supermarket).

 

[anne O'nymous]

I know it was long , but read again my post.

I did not say they cannot do it or that it cannot be considered a "business cost", only that they cannot just rely on what others says in random web sites, even if those "others" are lawyers, to decide if and how they can become compliant with the new UK rules.

And I haven't said that it's a random website, not that they are lawyers. It's a company whose business is, among other service, to provide legal age check framework to websites. Not understand what they deal with would be killing their business.
I also didn't said that they should just rely on them, explicitly pointing to the fact that this would give them a strong enough overview to know if it worse studying the possibility further or not.

So, perhaps that you should follow you own advice, and read twice before answer...

 

[defnotalt]

Eventually if their course of action keeps being to just block countries with strict law, it'll eventually reach a point in which they'll lose so much market share that they will either have to comply with the regulations or just go bankrupt. The wave of banning/restricting AI content has already began and it will not stop at a few US states/countries.