So "porn" has to, by definition, show nipples and genitals? And imagery that is strongly suggestive of sex but stops just short of showing the nipples is not porn?
I think that the dictionary and most English speakers would challenge your definition of porn.
I did a quick search on the word, and definitions vary. A dictionary does not require explicit content for something to be defined as porn - others do (http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/p/p0451600.html).
I myself do not classify things without explicit content as "porn". And, it would seem, neither does any official agency that deals with the matter.
For, has anyone reported the Heroes for Hire cover to the authorities? Have the authorities taken action? After all, you're not supposed to show "porn" to kids - it's illegal. So if your version of porn is the commonly accepted version, and thus the cover is indeed porn, it should be actionable.
I submit that while most people would see sexually-based imagery in the picture, few would actually call it "porn", and my guess is that, unless you can find a prosecutor with a personal axe to grind, you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone willing (or able) to bring real legal action against Marvel or various retailers for showing "porn" to minors over that image. (Or, for that matter, the examples you link to.)
A picture of a knife in a hand, menacing some person, is not a picture of actual violence, is not a picture of murder. It may imply such is forthcoming, but taken on its own, without further context, it cannot logically be called as such.
no subject
I think that the dictionary and most English speakers would challenge your definition of porn.
I did a quick search on the word, and definitions vary. A dictionary does not require explicit content for something to be defined as porn - others do (http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/p/p0451600.html).
I myself do not classify things without explicit content as "porn". And, it would seem, neither does any official agency that deals with the matter.
For, has anyone reported the Heroes for Hire cover to the authorities? Have the authorities taken action? After all, you're not supposed to show "porn" to kids - it's illegal. So if your version of porn is the commonly accepted version, and thus the cover is indeed porn, it should be actionable.
I submit that while most people would see sexually-based imagery in the picture, few would actually call it "porn", and my guess is that, unless you can find a prosecutor with a personal axe to grind, you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone willing (or able) to bring real legal action against Marvel or various retailers for showing "porn" to minors over that image. (Or, for that matter, the examples you link to.)
A picture of a knife in a hand, menacing some person, is not a picture of actual violence, is not a picture of murder. It may imply such is forthcoming, but taken on its own, without further context, it cannot logically be called as such.