View Single Post
Old 06-09-2008, 10:08 AM  
Quentin
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,280
Quote:
Originally Posted by V_RocKs View Post
Seems pretty clear to me.. this is CP
In that snippet of US code that you quoted, "simulated" refers to the sexual conduct, not the depiction itself being simulated. In other words, that statute prohibits depicting a simulated sexual act with a real child, not depictions involving simulated humans.

It is also worth noting that nothing in court's ruling in FSC v. Ashcroft (the "virtual cp" case) prevents a prosecutor from indicting simulated cp as obscene material -- they just can't charge the producer/distributor with producing/distributing cp, because the material does not involve actual underage human beings.

If you can indict Karen Fletcher for obscenity in response to her writing and selling cp stories, you can indict an artist for obscenity in response to them creating and selling CP cartoons.

I'm not saying that the government necessarily *should* pursue such prosecutions, just that they *can* do so.
__________________
Q. Boyer
Quentin is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote