The Classics

[all2true]

I was perusing the classics when It struck me,
Is there a way to search authors in the classic section?
I checked Seraph and none of the classics
Are listed when I do a search by Author

Did stormeagle actually write an independent tease?
It’s hard to search though 300 classics
To look for authors
Without an author’s search.

Is this a possibility?
To include that classics

Somewhat off topic, but do the classic teases ever appear as a random tease?

There is some great classic material out there,
I still have not read them all.

[stormeagle]

Did stormeagle actually write an independent tease?

Hmm? I didn't write any of them, no.

[mae0314]

There are no author and mostly no date or timestamp information for the classic teases.

[Jaberwocky]

Till a certain law (2257) was activated in the U.S., the site http://www.orgasmdenial.com used to have a lot of webteases and captioned images. (The webteases where stored in another format thus they had a maximum of 15 pages per tease)

Those webteases are called the classic ones. I am not even sure if the orgasmdenial site showed who those authors where. If so, it are names of people that are active on OD.com and they may not have an account on Milovana, or if they have one, it can be a different name.

As how those teases are saved and came to this site, I don't know.

[str0be]

Till a certain law (2257) was activated in the U.S.

OK, I'll bite, what did law 2257 do?

[seraph0x]

If ph0xy knows of an easy way to inject them into the same system as the current teases

This was proposed, but we didn't do it. Several reasons. The most important one is legal: The new teases are created and entered on Milovana. The legal situation with the classics is quite unclear. That's why we opted to keep them separate, so we don't get the two confused. The other minor reasons were all mentioned above.

I am not even sure if the orgasmdenial site showed who those authors where.

They did not. It is not known when or by whom the classics were published.

As how those teases are saved and came to this site, I don't know.

Stormeagle had a copy and sent it over to me. A number of volunteers helped me to clean up the archive: Fixing some of the typos, removing duplicates, that sort of thing. And then I released it as a package.

OK, I'll bite, what did law 2257 do?

18 U.S.C. 2257 - at least according to some interpretations - made it illegal for US sites to host adult images for which they could not prove the source. Since this was the case for most of the webtease images, OD.com decided it was not worth the risk and took the section down.

I am not a lawyer and 'tis no legal advice.

[Jaberwocky]

2257:
The reason that you should be able to prove the source, is to reduce the amount of childporn that is spread on the internet. (as you should also prove that the source is of legal age)
As you can imagine, on a couple of site, (like OD.com where they removed webteases if there was even the smallest amount of doubt if the person in the pictures was of legal age) this let to the discussion if the law was purely intended to stop childporn.

[str0be]

Ah, I should have no it was something like that. While being able to prove the source is good for stopping child porn (and for the sake of argument we'll just say anything with a person under 18) it is also useful for things like copyright infringements. I'm sure there is also something somewhere in it that's useful for getting compensation ($) for work done.