On The Insider: Britney's Bikini-Clad Top 10
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 3 of 43:
Next »
« Previous
There was a case several years ago
This case was about a family that took a cute piture of thier son in the bath tub. When the film was being developed the photoshop called the police and the couple was arrested and thier son taken from them. In the court case it was ruled that taking a picture like this did not meet the guidlines for child porn due the intentional use of the picture. Now while the picture in this context is legal it would be illegal in the context of porn site. If the parents sold the picture online in a collection of sexual pictures such as porn site that would be illegal even though there is nothing sexual about the picture. At this point the intention of the picture changed. I hope that the concept here comes out right as I'm going by memory here.

So to me it seems if two minors can have sex and say they video tape it for thier own uses the intention is not child porn. If they do it and sell then it is, if someone obtains the recording and tries to traffic the video they they are trafficing in child porn. So even if so creep talks a young couple into having sex in front of the camera it would still be a crime. Two kids on web cam broadcasting to the world would be a crime. Two kids in the privacy of thier own rooms recording it and keeping it amoungst themselves should not be a crime as long as the actions they do are legal.

Also.

They were 16 and 17. Can you tell the difference between a 16 and 18 year old? I know I can't. I remember when I was in college I knew a girl who you'd think was 12 and she actually 26. She was just really short and had a baby face. Then there was my cousin, she was 13 and getting into bars because she looked like she was old enough. She never got asked for ID. So had this photo gotten out on the net would any one really think the couple were underage. I think if it pop-up in my email box i'd delete as spam and just assume the couple was 18 years or older.

I suppose some pepophile would instantly see the child in the picture but I think they'd see that even if the couple were youthful looking and in there 20s. I honestly think people do see what they want to see. An arbitrary number dividing the line between young adults and adults really is meaningless.
Posted by: voska   Posted on: 02/09/07 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use
Reply to Story Reply to Message

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

I guess common sense has no place in the courtroom..  jakex3@... | 02/09/07
Here is the thing...  nucrash | 02/09/07
There was a case several years ago  voska | 02/09/07
I do worry about the standard of intent or thought police.  Laff | 02/09/07
Tha's the problem  voska | 02/09/07
Unimportant in this case though, isn't it?  klinke | 02/10/07
I'm always upset with the concept of using others lives  Laff | 02/09/07
Yeah that's silly  voska | 02/09/07
Interesting...  Laff | 02/09/07
That's the point  voska | 02/09/07
Always a brides maid....never a bride. Sigh.  Laff | 02/09/07
That may be true.  alphawiz | 02/12/07
Technophobic Judges  letsgetstoked | 02/09/07
remove them  theball | 02/12/07
Judges need restraint  ken-sullivan@... | 02/09/07
They have to show how they earn their wages  rdelaplaza | 02/13/07
Absurd ruling/law if I ever heard one....  shawkins | 02/09/07
So if I am 16 years old, male or female, and...  Beat a Dead Horse | 02/09/07
Ya, right  brandonspopo | 02/12/07
What about the kiddy pictures  RIAAsucks | 02/09/07
My thoughts also  SC-man | 02/09/07
Kiddy Pics  brandonspopo | 02/12/07
It's Florida folks...  pgm554 | 02/09/07
So its ok?  brandonspopo | 02/12/07
soo sad..  Been_Done_Before | 02/09/07
Yeah perhaps but in the end so?  Laff | 02/09/07
What about girls  brandonspopo | 02/12/07
More like...  SpikeyMike | 02/09/07
Off topic  SpikeyMike | 02/09/07
Witch hunt...  bobsc1@... | 02/09/07
Simple, sue the court  Boot_Agnostic | 02/12/07
Courts and Child Porn  brandonspopo | 02/12/07
Child Porn  jimbo48_z | 02/12/07
Laws Governing Minors...  conspicuouschick | 02/13/07
What it comes down to  edjcox@... | 02/12/07
YES  SillyDog | 02/12/07
Isn't a criminal record more damaging to these kids than naked photos?  bkshort@... | 02/12/07
of all the brain-damaged ideas...  case42tlc | 02/12/07
Here's two to grow on  Boot_Agnostic | 02/13/07
Florida  GrumpyOldMan | 02/13/07
Kids 15 and 14 : It happened "On March 25, 2004"  rdelaplaza | 02/13/07
not sure about that....  conspicuouschick | 02/13/07
other side of the fence  ttocsmij | 02/13/07

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads