OP probably thinks it would also include any fan service, but that would only be the case if the existing definitions include underwear advertisements as obscene.
Because it doesn't have to, it refers to another bill that defines what is obscene. You'll have to look at that bill before saying what it will or will not ban.
OP probably thinks it would also include any fan service, but that would only be the case if the existing definitions include underwear advertisements as obscene.
This bill is similar to the Protect Act of 2003 which the Supreme Court of the U.S. struck down
It depends on what counts as obscene.
The bill doesn't clearly limit what is considered obscene
Because it doesn't have to, it refers to another bill that defines what is obscene. You'll have to look at that bill before saying what it will or will not ban.
Technically the SC didn't "strike down" the Protect Act, only parts of it. And their ruling basically said "go read Ashcroft v FSC".