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.
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?
There’s a fundamental difference between doing that and publicizing something though.
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.
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?