>>http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyid=2005-12-21T151550Z_01_KNE073843_RTRUKOC_0_US-SEX.xml&rpc=22
>
>It hadda happen eventually. Up 'til now the standard has been 'community standards', but that always left people scratching their heads. You can't really define community standards in the law because they keep changing and evolving (or devolving depending on point of view). Since nobody knew how to define 'community standards', the supreme court felt they had to come up with a more measurable way to define obscenity.
>
>I think that what they came up with as a new definition (harm to the individual or to society) is really not bad as a definition. Whether or not they came to the correct conclusion based on their new definition is what is debatable.

I think people are confused, the groups are limited to groups of 2 and "club" is the Canadian word for house. LOL.