Pandora Blake overturns ATVOD ban on her Website

In 2014, English law was changed to bring adult video websites “in line” with the laws controlling what DVDs could sold from licenced sex shops so anything that the authorities deemed was “morally damaging” or could be considered to be life-threatening, such as face-sitting, strangulation and fisting was banned by the Authority for Television on Demand (ATVOD).

The change in the law also resulted in spanking that was beyond what appeared to be a “gentle level” (ie if it left marks), bondage and restraint involving gags and all four limbs, depictions of supposed “non-consensual” sex (even if it was obviously staged) and female ejaculation (because this was considered to be too close to watersports).

These changes lead to mass protests, including “Face-sit in” in front of the Houses of Parliament, because it appeared that ATVOD were targetting websites run by women, especially those ones which were being run by women who had dared to speak out against these new regulations.

One of those sites affected was Pandora Blakes’, however now Ofcom replaced ATVOD. following an appeal and support by Myles Jackman, they have decided that ATVOD had exceeded their authority because her site was not “Video on demand” and, as such should not have been subject to their regulation.

If should be noted that this doesn’t mean that these laws have gone away and, at the moment, other sites are still banned, but it’s good to at least see a small victory for those who go beyond mainstream sexuality.

See the full article on Pandora Blakes appeal here

Has this affected you?

Are you an adult video maker or webmaster? Have you been unfairly penalised by the authorities for “unacceptable” content?

Or maybe you’re a consumer of this material and feel that the Nanny State should stay out of our private lives?

Tell us what you think in the Comments below…

Published by Graham

Founder and owner of Affordable Leather Products, making and selling leather bondage and BDSM gear since 1993!

Join the Conversation

2 Comments

  1. If someone wants to look at the material I post and the activities are legal and between consenting adults, why should the State feel it necessary to interfere?

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.