Even if it does not ban anything (which is debatable), it still has the potential to. Most particularly Section 65 of the law: "the predominant impression conveyed is that the person shown is a child despite the fact that some of the physical characteristics shown are not those of a child." As well as the phrasing "imaginary persons", which means the characters involved do not need to be real.
While nothing definite has been produced as of yet, it is still responsible for one to bring this legal change into the public eye and to make it known how it could affect other people. The flexible nature of British law could very easily cause an individual to be prosecuted under Cartoon Law, and I would think it better to warn others and speculate (although speculation here has only occurred to the intention of a few words and phrases, and not the whole law itself) than to have one or many people taken down for something they were not aware of.
Even if it does not ban anything (which is debatable), it still has the potential to. Most particularly Section 65 of the law: "the predominant impression conveyed is that the person shown is a child despite the fact that some of the physical characteristics shown are not those of a child." As well as the phrasing "imaginary persons", which means the characters involved do not need to be real.
While nothing definite has been produced as of yet, it is still responsible for one to bring this legal change into the public eye and to make it known how it could affect other people. The flexible nature of British law could very easily cause an individual to be prosecuted under Cartoon Law, and I would think it better to warn others and speculate (although speculation here has only occurred to the intention of a few words and phrases, and not the whole law itself) than to have one or many people taken down for something they were not aware of.