I have been reading about cases like this for some time now and it really is beyond me how they can be perverted by the prosecutors up to "child pornography"
Their arguments are quite far fetched and overstress the fact that these are pictures of minors but seem to totally overlook a very simple fact that there is no pornography about them whatsoever.
To demonstrate my point simply: Suppose an adult woman takes a very provocative nude picture of herself and mails it to her equaly adult boyfriend, to spice things up in their relationship. Would anyone at that point characterize the photo as pornographic ? Certainly not.
Now suppose that this man, for whatever reason, be it of spite or idiocy, decides to reprint the photo and share it with a couple of friends, either to brag or to ridicule the afformentioned woman, the reason is irrelevant. At this point, would the photo be considered pornographic ? Certainly not. It might tip a morality scale, however noone would think "pornography" at this point,
Suppose now, that the man having received the praises of his friends about the contents of the photo and being of entrepreneurial spirit, decides to put the photo on the internet, place a few ads and charge 10 cents for anyone to see. Now, I think that that is the point where the photo would start being labeled as pornographic.
It is clear to me that the term "pornographic" encompasses invariably an intent of profit or at least some form of exploitation by the publisher of the photo for personal gain. None of the cases that were pursued by the authorities mentioned any sort of such intent, either by the minors on the pictures or by the ones that possessed copies of the photos.
There is a lot to be said about a society that produces young teenagers to take lewd pictures of themselves and send them to friends. But that is besides the point. I think there is a more, much more, to be said about a society that produces prosecutors who can simply not tell the difference between silly teenage behaviour and something as vile as child pornography.
Slashdot Mirror
I have been reading about cases like this for some time now and it really is beyond me how they can be perverted by the prosecutors up to "child pornography"
Their arguments are quite far fetched and overstress the fact that these are pictures of minors but seem to totally overlook a very simple fact that there is no pornography about them whatsoever.
To demonstrate my point simply: Suppose an adult woman takes a very provocative nude picture of herself and mails it to her equaly adult boyfriend, to spice things up in their relationship. Would anyone at that point characterize the photo as pornographic ? Certainly not.
Now suppose that this man, for whatever reason, be it of spite or idiocy, decides to reprint the photo and share it with a couple of friends, either to brag or to ridicule the afformentioned woman, the reason is irrelevant. At this point, would the photo be considered pornographic ? Certainly not. It might tip a morality scale, however noone would think "pornography" at this point,
Suppose now, that the man having received the praises of his friends about the contents of the photo and being of entrepreneurial spirit, decides to put the photo on the internet, place a few ads and charge 10 cents for anyone to see. Now, I think that that is the point where the photo would start being labeled as pornographic.
It is clear to me that the term "pornographic" encompasses invariably an intent of profit or at least some form of exploitation by the publisher of the photo for personal gain. None of the cases that were pursued by the authorities mentioned any sort of such intent, either by the minors on the pictures or by the ones that possessed copies of the photos.
There is a lot to be said about a society that produces young teenagers to take lewd pictures of themselves and send them to friends. But that is besides the point. I think there is a more, much more, to be said about a society that produces prosecutors who can simply not tell the difference between silly teenage behaviour and something as vile as child pornography.