Jennifer's Life [v1.0] [AbsentStudio]
Looks like the "old religious canon" isn't really well enforced...
For someone who claim to be a Lawyer, you strangely fail to understand something as basic as the fact that the consent have to happen in the game. Said otherwise, that the two characters pictured have to also be pictured as consenting.
It's obviously not you, the player, nor even them, the platform, who've to get that consent... It just need to be explicit enough in the story.
You are not the first one trying to teach me my work for 20 years and been studing12 years.
But please ar least goggle before.
So, can you you me where is that ruled?
Who told you that bullshit about consent?
First thing, in fact, the consent is not even a legal requirements. It's hard to explain from 0 but sites jeed the consent because they become jointly responsable with devs if an actor claims is damaging his honor or reputation or simple ask to be removed but not because a law put it as required. They ask in a video because they can't verify the authenticity of a document scanned but a digital sign certificated is good too.
In your head you are forgetting that internet is not under USA jurisdiction a v.g. a russian actor can choose jugde in Russia or any defendant address and only that law is valid.
If the actor keep silence is everything ok.
Anyway, the consent only use is prevent an eventual claim. Same based, they have no need to express been legal age.
By the way, in most European country's, central South America legal age is not 18, usually is 16. (Is not 18 very ridiculous, when 90% first time is between 14 and 16yo? Again some church prude there. And I double it, at the same time allow pedophile when the girl clearly looks like a 13 y.o. girl but they write: Sasha, 18 y .o., giving you the chance to change it, and like magic is everything cristal clear and protected by your law....)
I could make a book to fully explain this, but I hope is enough to see your ignorance.
For someone who claim to have a post graduate in Law in California, and therefore regarding common law, you seem to forget that said common law evolve with its time and the judicial precedent.
You keep talking only about the archaic USA system like the world is all around you.
Precisely, using 'precedents' is one of problems. 'Uses and customs' in the first approach you learn they always are against any change. They are based on tradition whitout rational reason (read Max Weber, Durkheim or any respected sociologist.)
A modern legal system make a Law after debating and approved by both legislative chambers. They are not a single law, they are all engaged making a 'SYSTEM' and been public allows to all the people clearly know them.
The Constitution is over all with basic rights and guarantees pritecting to the people, the employers, retired and kids, users and consumers and others. Not a few archeological amendments mostly not making any sense.
The precent is used like a law but not following any global system, was not created to solve a problem or give help to the citizen studying every possible situation and with 'justice' been the main purpose, it was only created to solve an unique and specific situation, unknown for citizens and made for a man with all his ideology in it. The usa supreme court had some greats members (like Marshal, or Brenan.) but also some members just pathetic.) .
And again, try to think before posting.
You just came blinded since you felt your big nationalism under atack put you in need to counter attack, then you didn't took a second to think and made very bad choices.
If you go again on your post i think how a big stupid you must be felling, trying to teach law to a lawyer!
And you would be right.
By the way, I never try to attack your dearest country nor any other. In fact, my country have much more to evolve than yours. I only referring to the Legal system.
