Throughout that period, the idea that it might be used to police one-to-one conversation does not seem to have figured highly in the thinking of police and prosecuting authorities.Indeed, as previously reported in The Register, a submission by Kent Police to the consultation on the extreme porn law in 2005/6 complained that the law was insufficient and, as they submitted: "There remains a legislative gap in terms of written fantasy material specifically about child rape and murder".

Adult chat roleplay-21

Their judgment was published in full, earlier this week, by blogger Obscenity Lawyer, a solicitor and one of the UK's leading legal experts providing advice to defendants on matters of obscenity and extreme porn.

The judgment states (par 21): There could be no sensible reason for the legislature having excluded otherwise obscene material from the scope of the legislation, merely because it was likely to be read by, and therefore liable to deprave and corrupt, only one person...

Weight is added to this contention by the IWF, who have told us that while they continue to report obscene adult content, hosted within the UK and publicly available online, they would not assess what was written in "a private online conversation".

The real danger lies in the fact that the history of UK law on matters sexual over the last couple of decades is that principles first introduced to protect children are often extended over time to other areas.

The rep pointed out that its efforts weren't always visible, though, since it sought to deal with such issues privately, and reminded players that "with millions of players in hundreds of servers and thousands of channels, it is impossible to manually monitor everywhere".

However, noted dens of filth like the Goldshire Inn on Moon Guard will get special attention.

This focus was picked upon by barrister Roger Daniells-Smith, who in an early appearance on behalf of GS reportedly told the court: "We say this is a moral crusade by Kent Police to extend the law, to try to get this material included as extreme pornography." Kent Police reject this.

They told us: "The only crusade Kent Police is on is to protect children from abuse including sexual exploitation. closes one door where people that would abuse children share and indulge in their fantasies online without the use of images, and prior to now have felt beyond the reach of the law in doing so." A spokeswoman for the Crown Prosecution Service explained: "The ruling reinforces the interpretation of 'persons' to include one person".

In the light of this ruling, GS, who had previously been defending against all counts, changed his plea to guilty.