Re: [Leica] Re: Pornography?

["Bryan Caldwell" <bcaldwell@softcom.net>]

As perhaps the only lawyer left here, perhaps I can clarify the definition
of child pornography (at least in the U.S.). It is somewhat complex and I'd
be happy to explain in more detail privately without taking up space here on
the LUG.

Child pornography is a separate category of expression which has no First
Amendment protection. It is different than pornography depicting adults and
it is different than material which is found to be "obscene." To be legally
classified as child pornography, a work must be photographic. The
photo/film/video must either be of children engaged in sexual acts (real or
simulated) or nudity which "constitutes a lewd exhibition or involves a
graphic focus on the genitals, and where the person depicted is neither the
child nor ward of the person charged." (Justice White)

As with most areas of U.S. Constitutional law, there are many unanswered
questions regarding this topic. But, it is clear that it (a) is treated
differently than depictions of adults, and (b) that it must be photographic
(for example a written story about children engaging in sexual acts could
not be child pornography).

Bryan


- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Quinn" <mlquinn@san.rr.com>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2000 7:43 PM
Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: Pornography?


> Pornographic? Come on. How can that be? Children so young can't be
> pornographic. They're essentially sexless creatures (with children's body
> parts).
> Pictures of them are just pictures of children. Period.
> Corollary: People who find pictures of children pornographic are ill.
> If someone gets turned on by elbows or chins, should we arrest anyone who
> takes pictures of them too?
> Why?
>
> Mike Quinn
>
> Nathan Wajsman wrote:
>
> On the other hand...I cannot completely fault the lab people for reporting
> her to the police. With the concern about child abuse it was not entirely
> unfounded. And most molesters are normal-looking regular people. In a way,
> the lab technicians and the police are perhaps responding to a valid
concern
> in today's society.
>