[pp.int.general] Caring children to censor Internet

[Richard Stallman]

I suggest focusing on the difference between depicting a child and
abuse of a real child.  Many countries start with the argument that
"child pornography" is made using a real act of child abuse, then
stretch the censorship to cover animation, even though making the
animation did not use any real action with real people.

It is common for movies to depict the killing and injury of people.
Filmmakers don't do this by killing or injuring actors; they have
found ways to depict death and injury without really doing them.
Likewise, they depict the hurting of animals without hurting a real
animal.  They can and do depict sex with a child without any real
child's having sex, and even without the participation of any real
child.  For the non-sexual wrongs, people are rational enough to
distinguish between appearance and reality; we can suggest applying
the same distinction in for sexual wrongs too.

There is no need for a law to censor films made by filming an action
which is a crime.  Consider the Zapruder film, which shows the murder
of President Kennedy.  Zapruder was not involved in murdering Kennedy,
he was just filming Kennedy's visit.  No one argues that his film
should be censored.  If, however, he had conspired in the murder of
Kennedy to make the film, that's a crime, film or no film.  Thus, a
law to censor films of murder is unjust in some cases, and superfluous
in others.

Sexual abuse is a crime already.  I think that anyone commercially
distributing a film which was made by real sexual abuse of an actor is
involved in that crime, and could be prosecuted already.  If not, this
would be a legitimate change to make.

How does that law proposal define "child"?  Referring to teenagers as
"children" in regard to sex is absurd but frequent.  In the US, anyone
under 18 is defined as a "child" for this purpose.  Most 16-year-olds
in the US have had sex, and in some states 16-year-olds can consent
legally to sex; but if they take a photo of their sex, that's a crime.

--
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation
51 Franklin St
Boston MA 02110
USA
www.fsf.org  www.gnu.org
Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software.
  Use Ekiga or an ordinary phone call