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!

Cartoon child porn falling down slippery slope.

BenFenner (981342) writes | more than 5 years ago

Censorship 1

BenFenner writes "Two out of the three Virginia judges involved with Dwight Whorley's case say cartoon images depicting sex acts with children are considered child pornography in the United States. Judge Paul V. Niemeyer noted the PROTECT Act of 2003, clearly states that "it is not a required element of any offense under this section that the minor depicted actually exists.""
Link to Original Source

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

"I'll know it when I see it" (1)

Arthur Grumbine (1086397) | more than 5 years ago | (#26244195)

If the depiction is not of an actual person, how can one determine that it is the depiction of "a minor", as opposed to a "very young looking 18 year old", or maybe (for the D&D/anime crowd) "a 300 year old elf/dwarf/fairy/other-long-lived-species that ages/matures at a much slower rate than us humans" ?! Is the basis for this implied ability to distinguish what is or isn't a fictional minor along the (legally) absurd lines of, "I'll know it when I see it"?!?

Well, I knew some 20-22 year-old girls in college that physically looked like they were 13-14. So here's the ultimate absurd possibility under the PROTECT Act:
A collection of oil paintings is discovered which are deemed to be "depicting lewd acts, in a fantasy setting, which involves a minor", and charges are leveled against the creator of these paintings. The creator, a petite elderly woman, says, "What?! Yes, I'm the one who painted those, but that 'minor' is me, from when I was 21 years old!! Here I even have nude photos of what I looked like back then. These are the exact photos that I used as my models for each of my paintings". The judge, undeterred, responds, "I don't need to see those photos to rule in this case. These paintings clearly depict two moons in the sky, unicorns, pegasi, and other fictional elements. Therefore these paintings along with the clearly underage character depicted in them, are fictional; regardless of any uncanny resemblance between the fictional 'minor' and your adult self, ma'am. For your decades of unrelenting efforts at undermining the moral foundations of our society, I'm sentencing you to 25 years in prison, and may God have mercy on your soul."
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?