The Supreme Court ruled in April that a definition of child porn
as it appears in a 1996 US law is too wide – to the point of being
unconstitutional. The Free Speech Coalition, a trade association
representing the US porn industry, had challenged the law which
expanded a long-standing ban on child porn to prohibit any image
that “appears to be” or “conveys the impression” of someone under
the age of 18 engaged in sexually explicit conduct. The law
targeted computer technologies that can be used to alter an
innocent picture of a child into a depiction of a child engaged in
sex.
The new law reaffirms the ban on virtual child porn “in a manner
that can withstand constitutional review,” according to Congressman
Lamar Smith, Chairman of the Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security
Subcommittee, who introduced the legislation. It refers to any
computer-generated image that is “virtually indistinguishable from
that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct.”
One member of the House of Representatives is quoted by Reuters,
criticising the bill as making the same mistakes as the original
legislation, although the bill is supported by the Bush
administration. The bill must now be considered by the Senate,
where other similar bills have been introduced.
