peperonity.net
Welcome, guest. You are not logged in.
Log in or join for free!
 
Stay logged in
Forgot login details?

Login
Stay logged in

For free!
Get started!

Text page


stop child pornography
a.anti-porn.peperonity.net

"♥*.¸Child Porngraphy ¸.*♥"

(¯`An Article·´¯)

.-*-.(¯`·´¯).-*-.
`·._.·`·.¸.·´·._.·´
¤°.¸¸.•´¯`»
`*•·.(´¯`v´¯`).·•*´
¸.·•*´`*.¸.*´`*•·.¸
¤°.¸¸.•´¯`»

CHILD
PORNOGRAPHY
Displaying child
pornography or "kiddie
porn" on the Internet is
illegal in the United States.
"Child pornography" is
easier to define than
more elusive concepts
such as " obscenity," but
several categories of
content exist that may or
may not constitute child
pornography, depending
upon the circumstances.
By using this webpage in
any way you agree that
you accept our Terms and
Conditions.
1. Introduction:
Producing, possessing or
distributing images of
minors (anyone under the
age of 18) engaged in
sexual conduct is illegal.
Some states in the United
States and many countries
allow sexual conduct and
marriage between adults
and minors, but visual
depictions of that conduct
are prohibited in the
United States by federal
law. Similarly, sexual
conduct between minors
or by a minor is often
tolerated but visual
depictions of that conduct
are also prohibited. Child
Pornography laws in the
United States exist to
protect children and are
strictly enforced -
websites that display any
content that might be
considered child
pornography should
expect to be prosecuted.
2. The First Amendment:
Unlike pornographic
images of adults, the First
Amendment does not
protect the possession or
distribution of child
pornography. Content
that depicts children
engaged in sexual
conduct is "a category of
material outside the
protection of the First
Amendment." New York v.
Ferber, 458 U.S. 747 1982.
The First Amendment
does protect some
material that could be
considered child
pornography, for example
images in a medical
textbook that show a
child's genitalia. Although
the possession or
distribution of such
images might be
protected by the First
Amendment when used
in a pediatric context, the
same images would
probably not be protected
if they were displayed on
an adult website. Unless
you have the resources of,
for example, Calvin Klein,
and can afford the legal
battle, play it safe and do
not display any
questionable images of
minors on your website.
3. Federal Statutes:
Title 18 of the United
States Code governs child
pornography. See Chapter
110, Sexual Exploitation
and Other Abuse of
Children. 18 U.S.C. § 2256
defines "Child
pornography" as:
"any visual depiction,
including any
photograph, film,
video, picture, or
computer or
computer-generated
image or picture,
whether made or
produced by
electronic,
mechanical, or other
means, of sexually
explicit conduct,
where -
(A) the
production of
such visual
depiction
involves the use
of a minor
engaging in
sexually explicit
conduct;
(B) such visual
depiction is, or
appears to be, of
a minor
engaging in
sexually explicit
conduct;
(C) such visual
depiction has
been created,
adapted, or
modified to
appear that an
identifiable
minor is
engaging in
sexually explicit
conduct; or
(D) such visual
depiction is
advertised,
promoted,
presented,
described, or
distributed in
such a manner
that conveys the
impression that
the material is or
contains a visual
depiction of a
minor engaging
in sexually
explicit
conduct . . ."
Section 2256 clearly
defines images of minors
engaged in sexually
explicit conduct as "Child
Pornography." It also,
however, adds to that
definition images that
appear to depict a minor
engaged in sexually
explicit conduct, and
images or advertisements
that suggest images of
minors engaged in
sexually explicit conduct.
Does that mean that adult
websites that display
sexually explicit images of
legal-age models in
pigtails with a lollipop,
while surrounded by
stuffed animals, can be
prosecuted under Child
Pornography laws? The
short answer is yes.
Future prosecutions will
determine which
direction the law is going.
See our Website
Prosecutions page for a
few examples of current
adult website legal issues.
If your adult website
displays images that
arguably appear to have
minors engaged in
sexually explicit conduct,
make sure that you are
prepared. You should
have the proper legal
forms that you need to
comply with federal
record keeping
requirements, and you
should have a lawyer who
has already seen your
adult website(s) and has
some idea about what
arguments he or she will
make if you are
prosecuted. You should
also have plenty of money
and a desire to make the
headlines. Remember, if
you are prosecuted for
violating child
pornography laws, a jury
will decide whether the
content on your adult
website is child
pornography. Without a
doubt, some juries will
see child pornography
where there is none.
4. Sexually Explicit
Conduct:
18 U.S.C. § 2252 prohibits
the production,
transportation, or
knowing receipt or
distribution of any visual
depiction "of a minor
engaging in sexually
explicit conduct." For the
purposes of Title 18, 18
U.S.C. § 2256 defines a
"minor" as any person
under the age of eighteen
years, and "sexually
explicit conduct" as actual
or simulated:
"(A) sexual
intercourse, including
genital-genital, oral-
genital, anal-genital,
or oral-anal, whether
between persons of
the same or opposite
sex;
(B) bestiality;
(C) masturbation;
(D) sadistic or
masochistic abuse; or
(E) lascivious
exhibition of the
genitals or pubic area
of any person"
"Sexual intercourse" and
"bestiality" (sex with an
animal) seem pretty clear -
if your website displays
images that a prosecutor
believes involve minors
engaged in sexual
intercourse or bestiality,
expect to be prosecuted.
Which acts constitute
"masturbation" or
"sadistic or masochistic
abuse" may be more
difficult to define, because
participants engaged in
such activities tend to do
so for a sexual purpose.
Clearly a child could
appear to be engaged in
such activities without
intending a sexual
purpose. What a child
intends by his or her
actions is irrelevant,
however, because Federal
law prohibits "simulated"
as well as actual acts.
Many states also address
this issue by prohibiting
images of minors
touching or displaying
their bodies "for the
purpose of sexual
stimulation of the
viewer." (See, for example,
California Penal Code §§
311.3-312.7 ).
Section (E) prohibits
images of "lascivious
exhibition of the genitals
or pubic area." Courts that
have interpreted this
section have done so
broadly - "as used in the
child pornography
statute, the ordinary
meaning of the phrase
"lascivious exhibition"
means a depiction which
displays or brings forth to
view in order to attract
notice to the genitals or
pubic area of children, in
order to excite lustfulness
or sexual stimulation in
the viewer." See United
States v Knox (1994). You
may risk prosecution if
your website displays
images of minors
depicted in a way that
excites viewers.
5. United States v Knox:
In Knox, a man who had
previously been convicted
of receiving child
pornography through the
mail ordered video tapes
(by mail) of girls between
the ages of ten and
seventeen who, in the
Court's words, "were
dancing or gyrating in a
fashion not natural for
their age." The girls wore
bikini bathing suits,
leotards, or underwear -
none of the girls in the
videos was nude. The
videos were set to music,
and it appeared that
someone off-camera was
directing the girls. The
photographer videotaped
the girls dancing, and
zoomed in on each girl's
pubic area for an
extended period of time.
Knox was prosecuted
under United States Child
Pornography laws.
Legal counsel for Knox
argued that "lascivious
exhibition of the genitals
or pubic area" meant that
the girls had to be nude -
wearing clothing meant
that that genitals and
pubic area were clearly
not exhibited. The Court
disagreed and held that
there was no nudity
requirement in the
statute: "the statutory
term "lascivious
exhibition of the genitals
or pubic area," as used in
18 U.S.C. § 2256(2)(E),
does not contain any
requirement that the child
subject's genitals or pubic
area be fully or partially
exposed or discernible
through his or her
opaque clothing."
6. Unanswered
Questions:
The Courts will likely
continue to define what is
prohibited ...


This page:




Help/FAQ | Terms | Imprint
Home People Pictures Videos Sites Blogs Chat
Top
.