Toon Zone Talkback - NSW Court Rules "Simpsons" Look-Alike Drawings are Child Porn

[chris n pat]

This is the talkback thread for New South Wales Court Rules "Simpsons" Look-Alike Drawings are Child Pornography.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,24767202-2,00.html

 

[shahab29inch]

Just when I think humanity can't sink any lower... "Wait a minute, we found another layer! Let's dig just a bit deeper."

 

[ajanimal123]

By that logic, they should be able to sue Matt Groening himself for putting Bart's wang in the movie.

 

[Mary Rashelle]

I'm really against child porn, but I think this is ridiculous, as the characters are just drawings.

 

[CrazeeGurl101z]

Yeah, same here

 

[Kunmui]

I agree with you for once.

It's just a cartoon. No real kids are getting harmed.

As long as it's just drawings, I don't consider it to be CP... and thankfully, neither does the US Supreme Court.

 

[ard16]

there are two sides to this.

That guy should have no problem marrying that Animated girl now.

 

[kanebigredmachine]

I WOULD HOPE SO!

 

[Bray]

And Neil had something to say about this.

So yeah, there's a fine line between cartoons and reality. And I hope that the New South Wales court understands that.

 

[Kathyrn]

I'm not sure what the law is in Australia (though according to Yahtzee it's all wonky) but the page doesn't tell us all of it I think. Did the man have regular child porn as well and they only used the cartoon stuff to add to his sentence? Was he on parole? If he was on parole, then parolees (here in the US) are sometimes forbidden from having any pornographic material or it will violate their parole (depending on what they were charged with), which would include cartoon pornography.

If it was just some drawing he got arrested for, then yes, it's pretty dumb. Child pornography laws are made to protect children, not to punish people for their urges. If no child is being harmed, it's not illegal (though some people will obviously disagree and call it a loophole)

 

[JoeBobWilly]

Here's the thing: if he was viewing it because he found it to be funny, then the whole thing is just ridiculous. But if he was getting off on it, then I would want that man behind bars.

 

[GOODNIGHT MOON]

Applying pornography laws to all form of medium (including drawings and written form) is, from what I can tell, common amongst Commonwealth country. There's similar blanket laws in Canada.

Oh and Simpson porn? That's pretty lame if you ask me.

 

[~*~Horse Lover!~*~]

Oh, come on, they're cartoons. If Simpsons porn is this guys thing, leave him alone. He's not hurting anyone.

 

[Taildog]

If pictures of naked cartoon children is considered child porn these days, then Japan is in for a whole world of hurt.

 

[MRP]

TeeHee I was going to so say that.

 

[edi e]

this is just ridiculous. its just a cartoon.

 

[Peatea]

If it was a real kid, I'd agree with that.

But it wasn't a real kid. He ain't harming anyone.

 

[peace :]]

I'm gonna go lol now.



This is just too stupid.

 

[C Three]

Well, actually, even if it was a real kid, masturbating to the act wouldn't be harming the child. It would be the initial act of filming the child that would harm the child, not the subsequent act of masturbation. I mean, if someone masturbates to videos of people getting stabbed to death then you wouldn't say that the person is harming people by masturbating to the video, would you? You would say that the act of stabbing people to death is harming people.

 

[desmondomwenga]

You have a point, but having child pornography is also supporting child pornography, which is almost just as bad as commiting it.

Having porn of cartoon characters, who happen to be children, though, isn't causing harm to anyone.