Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Japan Moves Toward Blocking Online Child Porn

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the so-stop-boycotting-nissim dept.

Government 374

crimeandpunishment writes "In the wake of increased international demands that it do something about its legal lenience toward child pornography, Japan is beginning to take action, albeit slowly. Thursday a government task force recommended that kiddie porn sites be blocked as soon as they're discovered, instead of waiting for an investigation or arrests. Making or distributing child porn is illegal in Japan, but possession is not ... and critics have called that a legal loophole making Japan an international hub for child porn."

cancel ×

374 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

They listen only when they want to? (2, Insightful)

BladeMelbourne (518866) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368096)

If only they listened to the world about whaling too.

Re:They listen only when they want to? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32368116)

Why? What's so special about whales?

Re:They listen only when they want to? (2, Informative)

spazdor (902907) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368264)

They dropped the bomb.

Re:They listen only when they want to? (2, Funny)

Is0m0rph (819726) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368828)

No they didn't. Chicken and cow framed whale and dolphin!

Re:They listen only when they want to? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32368404)

They're endangered.

And they're smarter than you are.

Re:They listen only when they want to? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32368464)

Survival of the fittest, my friend.

Re:They listen only when they want to? (3, Funny)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368162)

no one wants to see whale porn so there's probably no market for it.

Re:They listen only when they want to? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32368218)

speak for yourself, I go to the aquarium every day for that

Re:They listen only when they want to? (3, Funny)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368290)

speak for yourself, I go to the aquarium every day for that

You like to shave the whales, I see.

Re:They listen only when they want to? (1)

coaxial (28297) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368478)

Troy McClure? Is that you? Thanks to you, I mothballed my own battleship!

Re:They listen only when they want to? (1)

drachenstern (160456) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368262)

Rule 34 probably has something to do with it

Re:They listen only when they want to? (4, Funny)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368484)

WARNING!
Not suitable for work.
Not suitable for home either.
Not suitable for anywhere, really.

[link removed]

Re:They listen only when they want to? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32368654)

It's not as bad as you make out. Guy is brave - I'd be afraid of catching something from the rot.

I had my eyes squinted (blurry) and thought that was a girl at first. It looked like a girl riding - as in, riding - an upside-down whale. First thought was, WTF? Is that possible?!

BTW... there's a picture out there somewhere, of a killer whale (orca) upside-down, floating in a tank, with a massively long (2-6 feet IIRC) erect penis. I think a girl was standing nearby. Enjoy the nightmares.

Octopus porn? (1)

mangu (126918) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368566)

no one wants to see whale porn

You're right, Japanese seem to prefer octopus porn [google.com]

Re:They listen only when they want to? (1)

gregrah (1605707) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368258)

If Japan were to stop whaling then it may save a few whales - but we will lose out on an even scarcer and in my opinion more important resource: television programs featuring Sea Shepherds risking their lives in vain. I love that show...

Re:They listen only when they want to? (1)

lehphyro (1465921) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368338)

Um.. Only them?

Re:They listen only when they want to? (0, Troll)

BJ_Covert_Action (1499847) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368390)

In response to public criticisms abour Japanese whaling practices, Japanese officials had the following to say:

"A fuck-a-you whales!!!!!! And a fuck-a-you dolphiiiiiiiins!!!!!"

No further comment was necessary, but a young man that prides himself on his vocal abilities in the popular Rock Band video game exclaimed matter-of-factually:

"I don't give a crap about whales so go and hug a tree."

Re:They listen only when they want to? (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32368414)

If only they listened to the world about whaling too.

They do listen to the rest of the world about Whaling. The International Whaling Comittee gives them permission to hunt NON ENDANGERED whales. Which they do. And they can hunt like 5 blue whales per year or something to that effect. But the main thing is that the whales that the Sea Terrorists are trying to protect are non-endangered and a nuisance. And you namby pamby idiots rooting for them are just as bad as rooting for Osama. They're violating international law attacking unarmed fishermen who are following the law.

Re:They listen only when they want to? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32368546)

the main thing is that the whales that the Sea Terrorists are trying to protect are non-endangered and a nuisance. And you namby pamby idiots rooting for them are just as bad as rooting for Osama.

Obvious troll is obvious. (^_^)

Age of consent in Japan (4, Insightful)

ground.zero.612 (1563557) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368128)

I remember reading it is like twelve years old. That might not be true, but even if it is, who the fuck is the USA to tell Japan what constitutes child pornography?

If kids can make porn legally in Japan, who's fucking business is it really other than the Japanese?

Re:Age of consent in Japan (5, Insightful)

OzPeter (195038) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368232)

I remember reading it is like twelve years old. That might not be true, but even if it is, who the fuck is the USA to tell Japan what constitutes child pornography?

If kids can make porn legally in Japan, who's fucking business is it really other than the Japanese?

I don't know if you have noticed this but the US has been known to tell all sorts of sovereign states what they should and shouldn't do on quite a number of topics. Its the type of action that causes all sorts of people to yell and complain about imperialism by the US.

Re:Age of consent in Japan (2, Insightful)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368284)

If they had stronger militaries then they wouldn't get told what to do by the US. The US would suggest things instead.

Like the US and Russia, if Iran had invaded Kuwait like Russia invaded Georgia do you think the US would have sat on the sidelines?

Or China and Vietnam, if Vietnam had honked off Japan the way they did China in 1979 the US would have had planes across the border in minutes to bomb Vietnam.

Re:Age of consent in Japan (5, Funny)

mangu (126918) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368510)

If they had stronger militaries then they wouldn't get told what to do by the US

Japan tried this once. They failed.

Re:Age of consent in Japan (4, Funny)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368562)

The US tech tree was more robust as the game went on than the Japanese.

Re:Age of consent in Japan (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32369132)

If they had stronger militaries then they wouldn't get told what to do by the US

Japan tried this once. They failed.

++ funny

Re:Age of consent in Japan (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368482)

Then the should yell at their government for signing treaties. BTW it's a two way street.

The boy who cried "child porn" (5, Insightful)

mangu (126918) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368430)

Independent of the age at which something becomes "child porn", this expression is way too much overused. There was a time when someone saying "child porn" was sounding an alarm, today it's like background noise.

I admit I've seen lots and lots of porn on the web, but never anything that could be remotely called "child porn", unless you call adult women with small breasts and shaved pubic hair "children". If this "child porn" thing actually exists, which I doubt, it's so well hidden that any measures about blocking it are useless. Better try to block the Illuminati instead.

Sadly, the politicians have learned to use "child porn" like they use "terrorism", a convenient handle by which they are able to manipulate the masses.

Re:Age of consent in Japan (4, Informative)

Kjella (173770) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368514)

You should not confuse age of consent with the age something is considered child pornography. in Europe the age of consent ranges from 13-16 but the limit for child pornography is almost universally 18. You get a world of hurt from the "world community", meaning mostly the US, if you suggest anything lower. The age of consent don't matter that much because then the US can stick their head in the sand and pretend that if they can't see it, it isn't happening.

Japanese Porn (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32368140)

Japanese pron is always some naked woman being brutalized and jizzed on by five guys.

But for some reason they always censor out the cunt!

Is this why those guys feel compelled to beat and jizz on these poor women??

Cencorship, etc (4, Insightful)

dward90 (1813520) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368144)

Obviously, CP is bad. However, I personally commend the Japanese for being slow in attempting a censorship sweep that will cost resources and, ultimately, do between little and nothing to actually protect the actual victims.

Re:Cencorship, etc (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368168)

Care to back up your argument that not allowing child porn in no way impact the spread of it?

Re:Cencorship, etc (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32368248)

care to back up the argument that access to child porn stops the abuse of children? See i can use your false logic too!

Re:Cencorship, etc (5, Insightful)

JesseMcDonald (536341) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368306)

Why should the GP back up an argument he/she never made?

Note: "preventing spread of CP" != "protecting actual victims"

Re:Cencorship, etc (2, Insightful)

geekoid (135745) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368520)

If he had said 'current victims' you would be correct, but he said actual children. More CP = more victims.

I thought basic logic was in place, apparently not and I will need to spell everything out using small words and simple sentence.

Re:Cencorship, etc (4, Informative)

HungryHobo (1314109) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368646)

2 copies of the same picture of the same abuse does not mean more abuse than 1 copy of the picture of that abuse.

or do we need to spell everything out using small words and simple sentence.

Re:Cencorship, etc (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368938)

I think you do. I think More CP = Less victims.

Whats worse:
CP making it onto the net
or
CP existing with no record of it happening

Re:Cencorship, etc (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32368378)

Making simple possession illegal is sweeping the problem under the rug and doesn't target the essence of the problem, all the while putting people who have nothing to do with the terrible act in danger of having their lives also ruined for no good reason whatsoever.

Outlawing possession is naive and pointless. (4, Insightful)

elucido (870205) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368406)

Obviously, CP is bad.

However, I personally commend the Japanese for being slow in attempting a censorship sweep that will cost resources and, ultimately, do between little and nothing to actually protect the actual victims.

Obviously, CP is bad.

However, I personally commend the Japanese for being slow in attempting a censorship sweep that will cost resources and, ultimately, do between little and nothing to actually protect the actual victims.


"We're making an appeal today to build a society without child pornography," said Anges Chan, a UNICEF ambassador and well-known media personality in Japan. "We're trying to build a national movement to appeal to the government to outlaw the possession of child pornography."

Unless they can statistically prove that possession of evidence of the crime leads to
future crimes against children, having laws against possession is a law that is a problem in search of a solution. If police need search warrants they can find other ways to get them but having a search warrant which only leads to digital copies of evidence of the crime does not actually solve or prevent the crime.

So what is the purpose of tracking every copy? The only purpose I see in doing this is to track down the distributors. This would be fine but lets be serious, all they have to do is offer a bounty. "If you have information which leads to the arrest or conviction of a distributor of child porn you will be rewarded 500,000 yen."

Re:Outlawing possession is naive and pointless. (4, Interesting)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368552)

If police need search warrants they can find other ways to get them but having a search warrant which only leads to digital copies of evidence of the crime does not actually solve or prevent the crime.

But it sure makes for good PR. Much better headlines to say you've busted hundreds of icky pervs than to say you busted one guy who has a well documented track record of hurting kids.

Re:Outlawing possession is naive and pointless. (4, Insightful)

MozeeToby (1163751) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368790)

"If you have information which leads to the arrest or conviction of a distributor of child porn you will be rewarded 500,000 yen."

Good god is that ever ripe for abuse. I don't even consider myself a hacker and I'm pretty sure I could frame up the neighbor in less than a week with a couple hours research online. It would be all too easy to do, and at $5000 a pop I could make several hundred thousand dollars a year framing up people I don't like all the while being called a hero by those who don't understand how ludicrously full of holes modern computer security is.

Distribution not possession.. (1)

elucido (870205) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368916)

Sure you can hack somebody and upload the child porn and charge them with possession. I'm sure this happens to many people which is one of the reasons why possession laws are so flawed. What I'm saying is that distribution would need some legal document attached to it such as a domain registery, ISP records, website logs. And I'm not talking about distributing a few megs, or gigs, but hundreds of gigs. The type of distribution you'd expect to see from a criminal distribution ring.

Traffic analysis and other techniques can be used to get a search warrant. The informants are simply to conduct the search.

Sure it can be abused, but it's a lot better than what we have now.

Re:Outlawing possession is naive and pointless. (1)

Pharmboy (216950) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368922)

"If you have information which leads to the arrest or conviction of a distributor of child porn you will be rewarded 500,000 yen."

Might want to up the reward, that's less than $5k American, which won't rent you a crappy apartment in downtown Toyko for a month.

Re:Outlawing possession is naive and pointless. (1)

elucido (870205) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368960)

"If you have information which leads to the arrest or conviction of a distributor of child porn you will be rewarded 500,000 yen."

Might want to up the reward, that's less than $5k American, which won't rent you a crappy apartment in downtown Toyko for a month.

I know how much it is. Would you want enough money to buy a state of the art new computer if you turn in the pedophile IRC distribution channel?

Re:Cencorship, etc (1)

DrugCheese (266151) | more than 4 years ago | (#32369140)

Obviously, CP is bad. However, I personally commend the Japanese for being slow in attempting a censorship sweep that will cost resources and, ultimately, do between little and nothing to actually protect the actual victims.

The victims were victimized when the images/video were produced. And they are victimized every time they are viewed.

These safe houses condone CP, censoring them will help future would be victims. Also curbing the flow of CP could help would be victimizers from feeding their fetish.

the rest of the world should conform to japan. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32368156)

simply keeping child porn around on your HDD should not be illegal and what the rest of the world should be doing instead of criticizing japan.
just because 235235235235.jpg on the porn site you visited happens to be of a 17 year old girl instead of 18 and is stored in your browser cache DOES NOT MAKE YOU A PEDO.
GO JAPAN!

Re:the rest of the world should conform to japan. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32368214)

That, and the trend toward criminalizing drawings and renderings. You can't criminalize something just because you think it's creepy, gross, or offensive. It has to cause harm somehow.
If I were molested as a child, I would certainly feel harmed by distribution of the images. But who is hurt by drawings? Or the photoshopping of older girls to look younger (I think Law & Order once had an episode about how reprehensible that is...)?

It's already too late. (4, Insightful)

elucido (870205) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368642)

There are so many cameras and surveillance, with camera phones and facebook that its just too late to be concerned about childrens privacy. Nobody has privacy anymore.

The monster in this situation is the individual who molests the child and then tape records it. The recording is evidence and in my opinion has to be analyzed, the individuals who like watching the evidence might not be actual child molesters and the utilitarian thing to do would be to pay these individuals to find and download child pornography and act as informants to help track down the source.

I don't really think it's a good idea to put people in prison for having illegal bits on their computer. But I do understand that in order to get informants you have to have at least the threat of putting them in prison. That being said I don't think anyone put in prison for having illegal bits should be treated like a sex offender, I think the concept of sex offender now includes anyone convicted of any sort of sex cirme for any reason and in my opinion we need to separate the sex addicts from the violent sex offenders.

Violent sex offenders will use any means including violence, these are rapists, child molesters, the people we believe should be locked in prison for life.

Non-violent sex offenders who are actually sex addicts are in general addicted to a specific substance whether it be bits, a certain pattern of thinking, or a series of behaviors. These individuals get convicted because they have a picture of a 16 year old naked, or they are 21 and had sex with their 17 year old gf. These individuals don't belong in the same category as true violent sex offenders.

The solution in my opinion is to separate the categories so that individuals who are non violent don't get their lives ruined over something dumb. These individuals can help take down the actual violent sex offenders who rape and murder.

I was curious... (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32368386)

and searched usenets for childporn. I found it, and then deleted it. Months later my computer was seized by law enforcement because the guy I was renting a room from was under investigation for a completely separate matter.

The deleted cp was discovered and I was charged with posession. No jail time, but did have to work at the local animal shelter for a couple days a week for a couple months. The lawyer bill was about $4,000.

I would probably be much more bitter about the whole episode had I ended up being a Registered Sex Offender. Turns out that in my state the offender registry is reserved for the more serious offenses.

Witches are being hunted down, non-believers are being tortured: it's easy to see all our technological progress and think that we've progressed far beyond the fire and stake.

--

Re:I was curious... (1)

elucido (870205) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368716)

and searched usenets for childporn. I found it, and then deleted it. Months later my computer was seized by law enforcement because the guy I was renting a room from was under investigation for a completely separate matter.

The deleted cp was discovered and I was charged with posession. No jail time, but did have to work at the local animal shelter for a couple days a week for a couple months. The lawyer bill was about $4,000.

I would probably be much more bitter about the whole episode had I ended up being a Registered Sex Offender. Turns out that in my state the offender registry is reserved for the more serious offenses.

Witches are being hunted down, non-believers are being tortured: it's easy to see all our technological progress and think that we've progressed far beyond the fire and stake.

--

The situation is stupid very stupid and a waste of resources. Did LE ask you to help them track down the maker of the child pornography? I don't see what arresting you has accomplished in the context of making children safer.

This is equal to arresting somebody for possession of a joint, it doesn't stop the flow of narcotics or accomplish anything beyond just having somebody to arrest so that it looks like something is being accomplished.

Re:I was curious... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32368718)

How is someone curious about child porn? It's something you know you are or aren't attracted to. Sort of like being curious about beheadings. Or rape. Or murder. Or BDSM.

Re:I was curious... (5, Insightful)

mikael_j (106439) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368934)

And somehow teenagers across the world search out pictures of all the things you listed just to see what they're all about. Hell, there were a few kids in my old hometown who got arrested for possession of child pornography after they had a sort of "competition" to see which of them could find the most disgusting thing online, luckily for them it was obvious that this wasn't a gang of "teenage child rapists" or anything of the sort but rather just a few kids who were trying to gross each other out and ended up overstepping that invisible line in the sand (Murder videos? Ok. Videos of sex with animals? Perfectly legal. Various people hurting themselves in horrible ways? Sure, why not. Naked children? CUFF 'EM BOYS!)

Re:I was curious... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32368980)

Seems like you answered your own question.

Anyways, just to be sure: curious means just what it means. Curious as in, does it really exist on the internet. Curious as in, is it really just a couple clicks away.

However, implicit in your post is the assumption that acting on the curiosity of cp, as opposed to acting on, say, the curiosity of the other subjects you listed, indicates a distinct psychological flaw.

I disagree, and in fact believe the opposite: that a near or total suppression of curiosity indicates an unhealthy psyche. I would say my psychological flaw here is pathological-naivete.

--

Re:the rest of the world should conform to japan. (2, Insightful)

geekoid (135745) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368600)

Way ti really, really oversimplify. If CP was just 17 year olds that you had no reason to believe they where below legal age, you would have a point.
No take 10 years off that age.
Whole new ballgame. While someone will occasional be busted for the reason you described, there are rare and a result of forcing judges to not think about the context of the situation.

really, you're being stupid with that argument. Stupid about how law enforcement is done, stupid about the legal system and stupid about the total spectrum of who this involves.

Re:the rest of the world should conform to japan. (1)

elucido (870205) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368992)

Way ti really, really oversimplify. If CP was just 17 year olds that you had no reason to believe they where below legal age, you would have a point.
No take 10 years off that age.
Whole new ballgame. While someone will occasional be busted for the reason you described, there are rare and a result of forcing judges to not think about the context of the situation.

really, you're being stupid with that argument. Stupid about how law enforcement is done, stupid about the legal system and stupid about the total spectrum of who this involves.

How are you supposed to believe that to a jury? Physically there is no difference between a 17 and 18 year old. Anybody can be fooled. Honestly there is no difference from 16-20 in some cases. This doesn't change the fact that people can go to jail just for having nude images of a 17 year old even if the 17 year old is just a few months shy of being 18.

The laws are fundamentally stupid.

Re:the rest of the world should conform to japan. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32369056)

I've always had a problem with people considering porn of 17 a year old to be child porn, or even somehow morally wrong. I can see why exploiting 9 year olds is a problem but 16 and 17 year old girls ("jailbait") are old enough to give consent almost everywhere so what's the big deal about them producing porn? The vast majority of porn featuring girls of that age range is voluntarily produced anyway.

I'm guessing a lot of this "child porn" in japan is either post-pubescent (ie still under 18) or lolicon. I'm not sure how they view "jailbait" over there but lolicon is not only socially acceptable in japan but is also a huge market. Japan has one of the largest porn markets on the planet, mostly because people actually buy porn over there. A lot (most?) of this porn tends to come in the form of doujinshi which is basically manga, usually featuring underage girls.

HAVE YOU ALL FUCKING LOST IT? (-1, Flamebait)

CorporateSuit (1319461) | more than 4 years ago | (#32369134)

The posts on this article horrify me. 90% of them are, in fact, arguing that we should let people view child pornography, as long as they're "not distributing it". Have things changed so drastically since two days ago when I said that it was a slippery slope to this point? Did everyone decide to get together and prove my -1 post, modded "Troll" inappropriately, was a prophetic truth?

"As long as there's no victim things r ok! Duhr huhr! It's a thought crime!" So is the difference between manslaughter and premeditated murder! There's no philosophical debate here, you guys fantasize about screwing children and you want society to accept and facilitate that.

No, you sick fucks. No. Read up on any study done on the subject and you'll see how fantasy all so quickly leads to reality. Read on how pornography encourages, and leads to sexual deviancy (to the point where a very large margin of PROSTITUTES feel squeamish at what their clients request of them -- as you know, prostitutes are the biggest PRUDES of our western society!) Then come back here and read the posts on this article, and tell me that we're not sliding, very dangerously, down the slippery slope already.

Good on em. (1)

Capt.DrumkenBum (1173011) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368158)

I was going to say "Won't somebody think of the children." but then I thought maybe that is the problem. Some people are thinking too much about the children.

Obligatory (1)

mister_playboy (1474163) | more than 4 years ago | (#32369162)

I was going to say "Won't somebody think of the children." but then I thought maybe that is the problem. Some people are thinking too much about the children.

"Won't somebody please link to the children?"

*ducks*

A giant robot taskforce (1)

Haoie (1277294) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368172)

A giant robot taskforce has also been assembled to combat tentacles of, ahem, varying natures. Hooray!

2chan (1, Troll)

linzeal (197905) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368174)

My sister's wife taught English in the rural areas of Nagasaki pref. in the late 90's and she relayed a story about being astonished when she discovered 2chan [wikipedia.org] being browsed on the lab's computers. She tried to have the site blocked but the admin told her it was too popular. For those not in the know imagine 4chan but with even more lolicon, child porn and tentacle rape.

Re:2chan (4, Insightful)

Windwraith (932426) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368422)

Lies. I browse that site very often and you only find the lolicon on weekends in themed threads, and the CP is shunned like in other countries.
Even so the porn is relegated to three (four now) general boards, the rest being themed areas such as animal/insect photography, robots, mechanics, idols, general anime, 3D stuff, etc.
You are just trying to blow it out of proportion. Read the text on the boards too and you'd understand.

Re:2chan (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32368596)

That may be true now but not in the early 00's, it was the wild wild east for awhile. They have just set up and moved to their own 2chan-like forums now.

Re:2chan (1)

Stray7Xi (698337) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368826)

My sister's wife taught English in the rural areas of Nagasaki pref. in the late 90's and she relayed a story about being astonished when she discovered 2chan being browsed on the lab's computers. She tried to have the site blocked but the admin told her it was too popular. For those not in the know imagine 4chan but with even more lolicon, child porn and tentacle rape.

You linked to wikipedia for 2channel or 2ch.net, which is a text-only board so I doubt there's a whole lot of tentacle rape going on. 2Channel is a massive forum (wikipedia says possibly largest in world) and a legitimate internet site, ranked 190th for visits by alexa in world, 17th in Japan. Very unlikely it would ever be blocked. 2Chan.net or Futaba channel [wikipedia.org] on the other hand is a completely unrelated imageboard, still popular but not unblockably so (4505 world, 329JP).

Your mistake is akin to mistaking slashdot for slashfic [wikipedia.org] . Both intended for geeks, but one is good reading and the other is defiling everything I cherish. Identifying which is which is left to the reader.

Re:2chan (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32368844)

Your sister's wife eh? Can't imagine what she was doing on 2chan...

A few years ago (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32368200)

some European countries (at least The Netherlands) had legal possession of this stuff. So calling one of the last countries to not make it illegal "an international hub" is a bit over the top. I'd be more worried about countries that have high child prostitution.

I agree with shutting websites that distribute child pornography as soon as they are discovered, but on the news in The Netherlands today was the message that police and justice were too occupied with their (witch)hunt of child porn possessors to effectively go after the PRODUCERS and DISTRIBUTORS of it. A damn shame and a testament to how the police/justice need to prioritize their efforts.

Re:A few years ago (1)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368346)

I know about .nl. A decade ago we had a school employee surfing .nl bestiality and child porn on computers in an elementary school computer lab. I was tasked with surfing to all the sites in the computer history and figuring out what they were and checking that against the history on the computer.

Ick.

The employee wasn't fired but did quit.

WWhat took them so long? (5, Insightful)

elucido (870205) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368268)

Child prostitution should be illegal everywhere. Child porn is evidence of child prostitution in some cases and child abuse in others. It shouldn't be difficult to block websites from selling it.

To stop people from viewing it is a different matter entirely and in my opinion is technically impossible and unconstitutional because its relying on thought crime legislation. As long as no children are being victimized and nobody is profiting from it, it's not a problem.

Re:WWhat took them so long? (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368640)

It's child abuse in all cases.

It's not unconstitutional.
And while it's technically impossible, it helps keep it from appearing every where.

How do you have child porn without a victim?

Re:WWhat took them so long? (1)

elucido (870205) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368804)

It's child abuse in all cases.

It's not unconstitutional.
And while it's technically impossible, it helps keep it from appearing every where.

How do you have child porn without a victim?

Thought crimes violate free speech rights. Therefore it's unconstitutional. The Supreme Court might not see it that way but the Supreme Court views Corporations as immortals in the highlander sense of the word.

I never said production of child porn isn't child abuse. Obviously to create child pornography is a crime and usually involves child abuse. But you have situations where two children can create child porn themselves and who is the victim here?

It's just not a simple problem to solve. I think the only thing we can do is make sure adults are not preying upon children. Adults should go to prison if they create child pornography. I think everyone universally agrees on this. Adults also should go to prison if they profit from child pornography and everybody universally agrees on this.

Where people disagree is on how we take on the distributors, and on the constitutionality or unconstitutionality of possession of bits/thoughts as being a crime. I don't believe possession should be a crime and I think the Japanese have it right. I do believe it should be illegal to make a child porn website or try to profit from child porn because this is preying on the victims of child abuse.

If you think possession being a crime solves a particular problem why don't you highlight what problem it solves?

Re:WWhat took them so long? (4, Informative)

dissy (172727) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368910)

How do you have child porn without a victim?

With our current laws:

* Shes 17.98 years old
* Shes provably over 18, but depicting a child
* Shes a drawing
* Shes a computer generated image/video

Any of those criteria being met makes the media child porn to the law. All parties involved were fully willing adults with no victims.

Not saying any of those are the majority of child porn online, personally I'd guess it's an unfortunately small amount, but whatever the percentages there are some things the law deems child porn that do not in fact have any victims.

Re:WWhat took them so long? (1)

HungryHobo (1314109) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368816)

Just to throw complexity into the works there's a lot of screwed up laws in various countries that boil down to a number of insane situations like

Being guilty of creating and possessing child pornography if you snap a photo of yourself as a teenager and in many places teenagers can marry each other at 17 and have sex with their husband/wife but god forbid they video-tape the night of the honeymoon for themselves.

I mean seriously.
It creates situations where documenting utterly legal events where nobody is being taken advantage illegal.

Re:WWhat took them so long? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32368902)

Thank you for your opinions, Captain Obvious.

Re:WWhat took them so long? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32369092)

> As long as no children are being victimized and nobody is profiting from it, it's not a problem.

*buzzzzz* Wrong!

It's a supply and demand market out there guys... If there is no DEMAND, there will be no SUPPLY.

With supply comes the abuse to the children and the victimisation you are trying to avoid.

So yeah, viewing child porn is wrong, mmm'kay? You create the supply, you help with the suffering, even if only indirectly.

hmm... (5, Interesting)

theheadlessrabbit (1022587) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368310)

While child porn is certainly a very terrible thing, the rush to suppress it brings up an interesting point.

we often hear these two arguments:

possessing child porn = supports the industry and encourages further production
possessing downloaded music/movies = damages the industry and threatens further production

If downloading media is such a serious threat to the production of new content that laws have to be introduced to prevent unauthorized sharing, why isn't anyone suggesting that downloading child porn be encouraged to drive the producers out of business?

I guess one, (or both) of the above statements is false. Anyone care to take a guess which?

Re:hmm... (3, Insightful)

rcuhljr (1132713) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368508)

While I'll admit I laughed when I read this, I think the debunking to this argument would probably center around the fact that music and movies have legal avenues of purchase/sales that CP doesn't. Perhaps comparing it to going after distributors versus users and the war on drugs might yield some more useful comparisons.

Re:hmm... (0)

DerekLyons (302214) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368570)

I guess one, (or both) of the above statements is false. Anyone care to take a guess which?

Of course you forgot another option - that both are true, and utterly unrelated to each other.

Re:hmm... (4, Interesting)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368686)

I've always maintained that the (legal) porn industry could be put out of business very easily simply by having governments refuse to protect the pornographer's copyrights. Making all previously produced child pron easily available for free should in theory remove the profit motive to produce more, and therefore protect further minors from exploitation. However, I'm afraid most of the people in this "business" aren't in it for the money. I also don't see any compelling societal interest in blocking the production or distribution of virtual child porn that doesn't involve any actual minors in its production. Some theorize that allowing people to view certain kinds of fantasies make them more likely to indulge in those fantasies in real life, but I've seen no scientific evidence that this is true. I play MMORPGs, but I feel no compulsion whatsoever to go around killing ogres in real life!

Re:hmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32368846)

Porn is already the most commonly shared type of media, and you never hear about the PornIAA suing college students for having shitty copies of stuff.

Re:hmm... (1)

Luther Blisset (1770282) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368906)

Making all previously produced child pron easily available for free should in theory remove the profit motive to produce more, and therefore protect further minors from exploitation.

In theory. In practice, that'd require that those who would possess said child porn would not get bored of the already existing material after some time and produce more, or request that someone produces more. Not to mention that even if it removes the profit motive, there are still other motives for the production of child porn, and for sexually abusing minors.

Re:hmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32368710)

whoa whoa whoa.

One is a large industry that needs money, the other is a small industry that needs eyeballs to grow.

This is typical of anyu small group. A new band giving out the songs is a good way to get it around, however a popular group giving away a record it's a loss of revenue.

When I say giving away, I mean the literally, not 'pay what you want'.

So you are making a false comparison and confusing media with industry.

People in the CP industry get off on distributing and making more. Not from making money.

I work with people who specialize in getting these animal. I know the process and I have read several papers about the industry. Specifically the mind set of someone who does it.

Not. Comparable.

Re:hmm... (1)

zcat_NZ (267672) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368932)

Tim O'Reilly already provided the answer; "Piracy is a progressive taxation". http://openp2p.com/lpt/a/3015 [openp2p.com]

For more obscure works (eg sci-fi by Cory Doctorow, indie films such as Sita, Ink) free copying has a beneficial, promotional effect.

For already popular works (already heavily promoted legal music and movies) piracy replaces sales more than it encourages new sales.

CP is in the earlier category.

What about the Manga and Hentai stuff ? (1)

wood_dude (1548377) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368328)

What does Japan do about the Manga and Hentai stuff that rest of the world considers child porn but Japan considers 'just drawings', and dare I say part of Japanease culture ? I remember sitting on a train in Japan with the guy next to me reading 'Rape Man' and he was just your average dude going to work on the train. I'm not going to get drawn into a 'what is child porn' debate. But I do tend to think a drawing is a drawing, regardless of what's contained in the drawing.

Re:What about the Manga and Hentai stuff ? (1)

surveyork (1505897) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368518)

Not that I like lolicon manga but: What does the US do about violence in Hollywood movies and TV? It seems that the US consider violence a part of American culture.

Re:What about the Manga and Hentai stuff ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32368548)

Dude, if they got rid of the hentai, the economy of Japan would collapse in the space of one week, maybe two if they're REALLY lucky.

Proxies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32368384)

Could this include blocking content obtained using a proxy in Japan? People that still want access are going to find ways around it methinks...

What if they are Jewish? (1)

retardpicnic (1762292) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368396)

Jewish boys and girls become men and women at 13, not 18? In Iran its 15, In Scotland its 16. Who decided you weren't being taken advantage of at 18? does something magical happen on the last night of your 17th year that renders you mature?

Re:What if they are Jewish? (1)

mooingyak (720677) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368598)

Who decided you weren't being taken advantage of at 18? does something magical happen on the last night of your 17th year that renders you mature?

It's easy to say that a 6 year old is unable to consent and a 25 year old is able to. So we move in from those extremes and draw an arbitrary line somewhere at the higher end of the 'maybe' pile. Ultimately you've either got to pick a dividing line or hand discretionary power to police/prosecutors. I think both solutions have crapiness involved but the first IMHO is better. You can argue that the line is in the wrong place but that doesn't remove the problem where one day you're able to consent when you weren't yesterday.

Re:What if they are Jewish? (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32368702)

This is why these laws are bullshit. For example in Canada, AFAIK (unless it was changed recently) it was OK for a 30 year old to have sex with someone as young as 14!!! That may have been hiked recently to a more reasonable 16, but not sure. *But* you only need to have text describing child porn (ie. not a drawing, not a picture of actual abuse, but text) and you can be found guilty of possession of child porn. Same thing for that 30 year old that has sex with underage person - OK to actual have sex. Not OK to have picture of it, even if it was the younger person that created it!

Another recent example is Australia banning small-breasted porn stars from XXX movies in Australia. The apparent reason (in not so many words) is people that find women with small breasts attractive are pedophiles!!!! Now, why aren't women right's groups all over this shitty law??

This is why lots of these anti-child-porn laws are bullshit. I'm all for removing child molesters from society (that includes people creating real child porn), but there are laws that are overreaching and allow almost anyone to be liable.

Re:What if they are Jewish? (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368798)

Does something magical happen on the last night of your 17th year that renders you mature? Yes. If you're considered old enough to be sent to war to die for your country, you're also considered old enough to get laid first. (I believe in Chile the age of consent is also 13. I think we can all agree that using pre-teens is "child porn".

When I started sophomore year of high school in Fairbanks, I stayed with one of my dad's coworkers who had German porn featuring 14 year old girls naked. Of course, being 13 at the time, I didn't see any reason to suspect that it was illegal. He was just a sad, dirty old man whose work separated him from his wife for weeks at a time. Seemed pretty normal to me.

animated child porn (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368428)

Just a note,
I believe that Japan allows animated/drawn "child" porn.
So this would not be effecting any of that type.

Re:animated child porn (1)

wood_dude (1548377) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368576)

What would happen if you had 'real' child porn, but put it through a 'line drawing, edge detection and colour fill' shader on somthing like Photoshop or an auto Rotoscope'r video process. Would it still count ? Could you tell it was from an original ? Where is the line ? I can only see that actual acts against a real child can be sure to cross the line. ps. I'm not advocateing downloading CP, just don't know how the law makers can say where then line is if image possesion alone is a criminal offense.

A sad day (4, Funny)

surveyork (1505897) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368450)

for Pedobear.

Due process; always due process (1)

fnj (64210) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368496)

It is never appropriate to short circuit due process in legal matters. If you crack the door open, it will open a little wider each day, until the floodgates are wide. There is never an excuse for not waiting for an investigation or arrests, "just for this one kind of offense."

"THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

THEN THEY CAME for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

THEN THEY CAME for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up."

-- Pastor Martin Niemöller, 1946

Western society's sexual psychosis (5, Insightful)

nightfire-unique (253895) | more than 4 years ago | (#32368592)

I know I'm not alone in feeling uncomfortable about Western society's view of sex and nudity as something dangerous, mysterious, and generally negative. It varies from country to country, but it feels like we're continuing to regress into a puritanical and uneducated fear of our reproductive systems, even while other parts of our society leverage that fear - churches, MTV, clothing companies, magazines..

I worry that we're sending the wrong message to youth. That they should be denied sexual education, and told that they will be punished for developing sexually before some arbitrary age - typically several years after the onset of puberty.

Now I'm not going to argue that real commercial kiddy porn is a positive thing. But I also wish humanity would take a step back, a deep breath, and view the issue with some amount of rationality. For crying out loud, we're locking up our children for sending nude images of themselves! Talk about psychosis.

Many men are terrified to approach and help a child in need for fear of being caught up in this institutionalized hunt.

We're justifying censorship, Internet filtering, gestapo-state police invasions, horrific prison terms... for pictures. For all we know (and we don't because research on the subject is utterly impossible), pictures help otherwise decent human beings who happen to be attracted to young people to cope with their sexual orientation. By threatening dozens of years in jail for simple possession, we could be encouraging those inclined to go out and find the real thing.

Why not focus our efforts and energy on things we can (probably) all agree are worse for kids than possession of images like ending child hunger and poverty, war, child soldiers, and such things? Japan can sort her own issues.

Re:Western society's sexual psychosis (0, Flamebait)

cdrguru (88047) | more than 4 years ago | (#32369030)

Kiddie porn pictures are not a substitute for "the real thing". If anything, there is considerable evidence that kiddie porn pictures incent the possessor to go and get the real thing.

Also, in most cases these pictures are sold, not given away freely. If there is a demand and a marketplace there will be folks that will supply it. All you need is a camera and a child or two. And children are pretty easy to get. If a child isn't interested in cooperating, they will be after a few slaps.

Just having such a marketplace is incredibly destructive to children. If it was all about just passing pictures around for free and children freely taking them for people's enjoyment that would be a completely different matter.

Show us the evidence or shut up. (4, Insightful)

elucido (870205) | more than 4 years ago | (#32369112)

Kiddie porn pictures are not a substitute for "the real thing". If anything, there is considerable evidence that kiddie porn pictures incent the possessor to go and get the real thing.

Also, in most cases these pictures are sold, not given away freely. If there is a demand and a marketplace there will be folks that will supply it. All you need is a camera and a child or two. And children are pretty easy to get. If a child isn't interested in cooperating, they will be after a few slaps.

Just having such a marketplace is incredibly destructive to children. If it was all about just passing pictures around for free and children freely taking them for people's enjoyment that would be a completely different matter.

So you believe it's a statistic fact beyond the margin of error that people do what they watch on TV? People watch horror movies because they secretly want to kill people? People watch gross videos on the internet because they secretly want to do it? This is basically saying that anything a person thinks about for a long enough time, they will be compelled to do it.

This is not true. I'm sure the majority of us have thought about killing people but how many of us are actually murderers? Less than 1% probably. How many individuals who look at child porn or who have been convicted of possession of child pornography are violent enough to actually go molest a child?

The majority of adult individuals know the difference between fantasy and reality. Fantasy is stuff people imagine doing because they'll never be able to do it. People enter fantasy worlds to escape from the mundane real world. Then you have sick monsters who hear voices and have to obey the voices in their head, or who are without conscience and empathy and can rape and torture a child without remorse.

Lets be realistic, the majority of human beings aren't that. And if the majority aren't crazy like that it makes no sense to create laws expecting people to act like that. Lets put it simple, if you saw someone murdered on tape you wouldn't go and murder somebody would you? Because you have a conscience right?

Define Child (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32369034)

What exactly is considered a child...

under 18? 16? 12?

next how do you prove an image of someone is not above that age? (can a cartoon character/drawing be considered a child?)

and then you need to define porn... is it nudity period or do they actually have to be intimate?

now once you have that decided on... (yeah right)

how do you enforce it in such a way that you don't stomp over the rights of everyone to get after the people
producing said porn

Unbelievable (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32369158)

Japan banning child porn would be like America banning greasy hamburgers. NOT going to happen.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?