Quoted: I work at Walgreens.
We are told that we can print up pictures with nudity but no actual sex.
|
The normal industry standard is that if it's not supposed to go through the US Mail then we won't print it.
federal law (Title 18, United States Code, Section 1461), makes it a crime to mail "obscene" matter, and the mailing of such matter has been investigated by the Postal Inspection Service for over a century. "Obscenity" was constitutionally defined by the U.S. Supreme Court in its 1973 of Miller versus California decision. To be obscene, material, "taken as a whole," must:
* Appeal to a prurient [typified by obsessiveness] interest in sex;
* Contain "patently offensive depictions or descriptions of specific sexual conduct," as judged by a local grand jury in light of the contemporary standards in the affected community; and
* On the whole, have "no serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value."
|
Working in professional labs allows me the luxury of sometimes having professional customers who if they are going to be working in the area of explicit images will talk to us about their work and we reach an agreement about doing their work.
For years every week a big box of slides would arrive via FedEx to be scanned to PhotoCd and sent back to the client, it was all destined for the internet, pretty much no one that works at that lab knows about that work because of the rules about keeping the work to the area it belongs in.
I had to talk to a customer one time about some odd photographs that were in the middle of her roll of file. It was clear that her kid(s) (6-9yrs oldish) had gotten their hands on the camera and were snapping photos while horsing around at somepoint in the horsing around some of the clothes came off, no nudity was involved.
It was embarassing having to talk to a customer about it, but damn she was mad, very mad when she looked at the photos and figured out by who wasn't in the pictures which kid had been taking them.