AKB48: “We’ll Sue You If You Call This Child Porn!”

akb48-tomomi-kasai-hand-bra.jpg

AKB48 is reportedly threatening to sue the mass media should it dare to call its Tomomi Kasai child breast fondling picture “child porn.”

After the now infamous promotional picture of Tomomi Kasai having her breasts fondled by a little boy caused Kadokawa to hurriedly withdraw the offending magazine, only to face a barrage of criticism which looks to have triggered a police child pornography investigation, AKB48 is now apparently making legal threats against mass media in an effort to prevent further damage to its reputation.

According to sources with a “sports” newspaper which reported on the scandal, their suggestion that the image might constitute “child porn” enraged the group’s management, which proceeded to warn media companies that “you may cover this incident, but not using the words ‘child pornography.’ Should you use these words, you will be subject to legal action.”

Newspaper staff comment that the group has for some years employed a phalanx of lawyers for the purpose of applying legal pressure to the mass media should it dare to cover the group unfavourably – although when it comes to TV and magazines the threat of withdrawing access to their girls is probably rather more potent.

Unfortunately for AKB48′s media management strategy, those of the online masses who are not actively worshipping AKB48 generally seem scandalised at the level of influence the AKB48 media empire exerts over Japan’s wider mass media – although fortunately nobody takes any notice of them:

“Criminals threatening legal action, typical yakuza tactics.”

“As usual the mass media are too scared to oppose a strong target.”

“Why can’t they just cover this stuff as well?”

“Because the agencies behind AKB48 will pull all their access to other idols as well.”

“If they get sued you’d expect them to more than make up the difference in extra sales?”

“At least the mass media realises they are slaves to AKB48 now.”

“Why is Agnes keeping quiet about all this?”

“Seriously, I don’t see what part of using a little boy to cover the breasts of an idol for promotional purposes would not constitute child porn.”

“No way does this constitute child porn.”

“There are opinions from an actual lawyer that it could easily constitute child porn.”

“Who cares either way, it is still some seriously creepy marketing.”

“What does anyone expect from the world of show business in the first place? It was always rotten.”

“They have as much influence as Johnny’s now.”

“It’s kind of messed up that everyone just overlooks the fact that this group makes its money indirectly sexualising young girls in the first place.”


    Post Comment »
    109 Comments
    Sort by: Date | Score
    Comment by Anonymous
    20:54 26/01/2013 # ! Quality (+1.0)

    Somebody need to teach that photographer how to take pictures somebody's damn brat's hands are in the way of the shot.

    Comment by Anonymous
    14:05 27/01/2013 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    what he said!

    Comment by Anonymous
    19:14 28/01/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    She doesn't look anything special. Just because the name AKB is slapped onto anything she is related to, an averagely talented person becomes a huge idol. TBH, many porn stars look better than her.

    Avatar of Ota-Kool
    Comment by Ota-Kool
    10:51 27/01/2013 # ! Neutral (-0.2)

    You mean those hand should be 'yours to touch'?

    Avatar of Benoist
    Comment by Benoist
    19:18 26/01/2013 # ! Quality (+1.0)

    AKB48 and media : "let's overract together, draw attention on us, and sell things ! yay !"

    Comment by Anonymous
    16:55 27/01/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    Good point you brought here. Maybe no side even cares at all if this is child porn or not, as long as both keep getting profit from all the media covering.

    Comment by Anonymous
    03:37 27/01/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    Not like that has never been done before. XD

    Comment by Anonymous
    20:15 26/01/2013 # ! Good (+0.6)

    I'm annoyed at anyone taking defense of either AKB48 or the mass media... fuck em all.

    All I know is, that pic is awesome.

    Avatar of ChaosConsuming
    Comment by ChaosConsuming
    06:49 27/01/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    I'm not sure if any of you have ever noticed this.

    Notice the lighting is different between her and the kid? The kids hair is clearly reflecting a light source just above him aswell as lighting on both sides of his face, where as the light sources on the girl have been diffused to light all areas of her equally and you cannot distinguish the direction that the light is coming from.

    Any professional photography of a model or product always has every light source diffused to avoid casting shadows.

    I may be wrong but I believe this is photo edited to have the kids head sticking out from behind her, the original more then likely had the kid completely covered by her body. I don't know who would have done the editing (AKB48?) or for what purpose but there it is.

    Comment by Anonymous
    00:22 27/01/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    And that kid is one lucky little bastard.

    Comment by Anonymous
    07:15 27/01/2013 # ! Neutral (+0.4)

    Here we go again.

    Avatar of Riiku
    Comment by Riiku
    02:38 27/01/2013 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    Yeah, those hands are actually a very stylish bra.

    Avatar of coquette
    Comment by coquette
    09:10 27/01/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    Actually you're not too far off. They make
    a bra which is just the cups and you use adhesive to attache it under your breasts.
    Even looks like that kids hands. You use it for strapless dresses and gowns.

    I female and I don't see the "kiddie porn"
    angle. Just media nonsense.

    Comment by Anonymous

    If those are really his hands. For all we know they could be fake arms and he's just standing behind her. Unless there's a green screen in which case there is no kid.

    LIES!! ALL LIES!!!!

    Comment by Anonymous

    In denial arnt we.....

    Comment by Anonymous

    Ah!hahah

    Comment by Anonymous

    oh what i would give to be that kids hands

    Comment by Anonymous
    21:51 26/01/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    I DREAM A DAY THAT

    Otakus @ Mass Media:"We sue you if you call 2D creepy"

    Comment by Anonymous
    13:20 27/01/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    Don't be ridiculous. Otakus can't afford to hire lawyers, they spend all their money on tissues and hand lotion.

    Comment by Anonymous
    18:52 27/01/2013 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    Well actually they spend about $10,000 on boxes filled with CD's of shitty music all so that they can cum in their hands and shake hands with a 16 year old girl.

    Comment by Anonymous
    14:40 27/01/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    You mean
    super-expensive-cameras +
    really-expensive-anime-DVD/BR +
    super-expensive-limited-edition-goods +
    did-you-know-dakimakuras-are-quite-expensive? +
    video-games +
    high-spec-computer-rig

    Comment by Taylor
    22:34 26/01/2013 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    If I see this littl mthrfkrs pictures one more damn time on sankaku ONE MORE DAMN TIME...

    Avatar of Asian Guy
    Comment by Asian Guy
    05:40 27/01/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    Lol i know right

    Comment by Anonymous
    20:56 26/01/2013 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    i like her tits

    Comment by Anonymous
    00:00 27/01/2013 # ! Neutral (+0.4)

    Call me when she decides to do AV....

    Comment by Anonymous
    23:25 26/01/2013 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    What about the Time magazine that shows some woman with a maybe 3 or 4 years old on her tit sucking away. That's not child porn?

    You got topless native girls running around all over South America and Africa. It's an udder, get over it.

    Comment by Anonymous
    13:26 28/01/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    I've actually seen films in Italian and others in Spanish where little boys have not only gotten to see completely nude women, but sometimes even grope breasts. Not even an eyebrow raised over that. They're considered the same as any other film in European and Spanish-speaking countries. Kids can see nudity sitting on the magazine shelves in some European countries. But none of those countries are ever considered problematic, no one ever wonders "how do those people raise their children?". Because their lives are still perfectly fine!

    Sure there's child-damaging child porn out there, but if it wasn't for the modern insanity over blowing up things like this in certain societies sexually confused (Japan, America, etc) a pic like this would be considered innocent, even humorous.

    Avatar of pantsu
    Comment by pantsu
    18:52 27/01/2013 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    AKB48 can babysit my kids anytime.

    Avatar of Sado-Sensei
    Comment by Sado-Sensei
    20:22 26/01/2013 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    He's an albino 30-year-old midget. Jeez.

    Comment by Anonymous
    19:46 26/01/2013 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    pls stop all the legal talk and pointless arguments for a second....

    and use some common sense......

    Comment by Anonymous
    20:02 26/01/2013 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    I would love to see this happen as well, but unfortunately, common sense is in short supply these days.

    What really gets me about all this is the fact that they're attacking it while completely ignoring the loli grav idol DVDs. Some of the most risque of them have genitals peaking out at times.

    I think what it comes down to is, is all the old men are jealous of that boy. Or maybe they're fans and are pissed that someone dared touch "their" property.

    Comment by Anonymous
    00:10 27/01/2013 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    "It’s kind of messed up that everyone just overlooks the fact that this group makes its money indirectly sexualizing young girls in the first place.”

    ^
    This

    Comment by Anonymous
    09:44 27/01/2013 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    I hate those pretty boy and Bieber. They look like a woman, act like woman but somehow they are the popular man around. The song is not even that good, all they got are the face.

    I have a problem when a song is on top of a chart because the singer is handsome and not because the song is good. This is a song contest, not handsome Peugeot dammit.

    Comment by Anonymous
    12:21 27/01/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    ever wonder why boku no pico was so popular?

    Comment by Anonymous
    12:06 27/01/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    We're all sexual beings.... as long we're post-puberty.

    Comment by Anonymous
    06:46 27/01/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    1. Johnny's makes it's dough sexualizing boys and men. Difference?

    2. The ENTIRE WORLD makes money sexualizing young girls...any reason you're singling out an idol band and ignoring say American pre-teen beauty pageants...or how about tennis...is it necessary for girls to play in a miniskirt?

    Comment by Anonymous

    I hate those pretty boy and Bieber. They look like a woman, act like woman but somehow they are the popular man around.

    That's called jealousy.

    Comment by Anonymous
    20:35 26/01/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    the fact that they think hes "European" stings a little as well. Since some Japanese are really patriotic.

    Comment by Anonymous
    13:25 27/01/2013 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    I'd go with racist.

    Comment by Anonymous
    20:52 26/01/2013 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    Patriotic or just racist

    Comment by Anonymous
    22:13 26/01/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    we can't even be sure that those hands belong to the kid...

    Avatar of Erranty
    Comment by Erranty
    20:41 26/01/2013 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    Gotta side with AKB48 on this one (oh god why). When there's legal action being taken against you for such a stupid reason, not to mention whoever's doing so is overreaching with "child pornography" as their reason, you but out your legal team.

    When the media slanders you, you sue them straight to hell. No threats, just sue them to hell for stepping out of line again.

    1. The child isn't naked.
    2. She's most likely wearing pasties just in case.
    3. That child is Asian, fuck the moron's that think he's White.
    4. That slightly uncomfortable look on her face DOES NOT make the child suddenly look sexy.

    Comment by Anonymous
    22:14 26/01/2013 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    So if they were to take a picture of a little girl covering a guys genitals with her hands, that wouldn't be considered child porn either by your reasoning?

    Sorry to say, but every court would think otherwise.

    Comment by Anonymous
    22:27 26/01/2013 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    Are you seriously equating breasts with genitalia? What is wrong with you.

    Avatar of Erranty
    Comment by Erranty
    12:55 24/05/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    But Breasts are not Genitalia, which is the key issue here and the only reason this is being debated.

    Avatar of 3rdEye
    Comment by 3rdEye
    23:03 26/01/2013 # ! Neutral (-0.2)

    Breasts = sexual object to the media, and to the men of world. And this case, where they're promoting the sexual aspect of one of their idol is surely no different.
    The closest thing I could equate this is if a little girl embraced a man in boxer, just above the "danger zone", but still clearly in a sensual place still.

    Comment by Anonymous
    21:24 26/01/2013 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    I say when in doubt, side with the group with the hotter chicks.

    They would win, too. They're confident because they know that this picture can't be proven to be child porn. It can just look like an innocent boy trying to cover a woman's bits up from lecherous eyes.

    They should have just released it. The controversy from the press would have helped make them a pretty penny. I'd be surprised if there wasn't already doujin pictures out there that are parodying this, like what happened with that old Janet Jackson magazine cover that was actually similar to this picture.

    The press was stupid to take a little hasty bite when it saw the opportunity. It takes more than one little bite to get anything out of a giant.

    Comment by Anonymous
    14:08 27/01/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    Seriously, race doesn't actually matter.

    Comment by Anonymous
    21:10 28/01/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    It's not surprising, coming from the country that has "sexy videos" of what, 12yr old kids in skimpy swim suits?

    Avatar of Actar
    Comment by Actar
    21:59 26/01/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    While I and commonsense would agree with you, the Japanese law is pretty clear on this:

    1) Any pose of a child engaged in sexual intercourse or any conduct similar to sexual intercourse;
    2) Any pose of a child having his or her sex organs, etc. touched by another person or of a child touching another person’s sex organs, etc., which arouses or stimulates the viewer’s sexual desire;
    3) Any pose of a child wholly or partially naked, which arouses or stimulates the viewer’s sexual desire.

    Avatar of Erranty
    Comment by Erranty
    12:54 24/05/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    Yes, but when you break those down.

    1. The child isn't engaging in sex, sexual intercourse, or imitating sexual intercourse.

    2. Sex organs specifically are Genitalia. Breasts are not used in reproduction, excluding them from being considered Genitals or "Sex Organs."

    3. The child appears to be wearing clothes. So the person that's attracted to the child would have to be using their own imagination.





    Post Comment »

Popular

Recent News

Recent Galleries

Recent Comments