OK... You have valid points lucky1 and it remains for the prosecution to present a valid case. It appears from that news clip they propose to show that the defendants ?transport child pornography in interstate commerce? and it remains to be seen what evidence they may present to substantiate that allegation.
Despite all laws, there is a judgement, more a moral one, to be made by webmasters as to whether they would operate websites depicting children - clothed or not.
I'd be at the top of the queue in defending genuine stuff on valid grounds, but can't remotely see how this is valid. It is clear from the imaging that the websites are pandering to a pedo element (and, nasty me, suspect the biz model can often be to use these sites as "feeders" to other stuff) and using the "pedo world" keywords to attract traffic.
As a moral judgement, this stuff is utter shit from the gutter and better they are wiped off the net by whatever means. "Phoney pedo" sites are pandering to a very large, but perverse element of society and there are far more serious issues underneath and involving actual abuse of children.
The defendants made their judgement - the time has come to defend that (and chances are some lawyer will present a reasonable defense), but whether a jury convicts or not - they need to be wiped off the map. Webby's law applies
