Court Determines That Downloading Porn Qualifies As Making Porn
from the stretching-the-law dept
Child pornography is obviously a subject that gets a strong negative reaction from most people -- as it should. However, it gets a little worrisome when that reaction clouds legal judgment. We've had stories in the past of child porn busts based on very bad info, and now Jim submits a story about an appeals court in Michigan that has decided that downloading and putting child porn on a CD is "making" it under the law. The guy in question clearly had child porn, and should be punished accordingly -- but the question is whether he should be charged with "possession" or "making" it. Obviously, making it gets you more stringent penalties. However, the court has decided that the guy who downloaded it and burned it to a CD has, under its understanding, "made" the pornography. The folks over at Slashdot have quite a discussion going on this as well. While this case is likely to go up to the state Supreme Court before it's finally decided, it raises some questions for other, non-child porn, content as well. For example, with just regular movies and music, it could change the type of punishment the entertainment industry could go after for anyone caught burning content to a CD or DVD -- or even just moving content to an iPod.Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Downloading qualifies as making?
Not only that, but all of these movie-makers will, presumably, have copyright on what they have 'made', and therefore be in a position to sue other makers of similar content (including the big media corps) for breach?
What a fiasco!
---
Child pornography is obviously a subject that gets a strong negative reaction from most people -- as it should. However, it gets a little worrisome when that reaction clouds legal judgment. We've had stories in the past of child porn busts based on very bad info, and now Jim submits a story about an appeals court in Michigan that has decided that downloading and putting child porn on a CD is "making" it under the law. The guy in question clearly had child porn, and should be punished accordingly -- but the question is whether he should be charged with "possession" or "making" it. Obviously, making it gets you more stringent penalties. However, the court has decided that the guy who downloaded it and burned it to a CD has, under its understanding, "made" the pornography. The folks over at Slashdot have quite a discussion going on this as well. While this case is likely to go up to the state Supreme Court before it's finally decided, it raises some questions for other, non-child porn, content as well. For example, with just regular movies and music, it could change the type of punishment the entertainment industry could go after for anyone caught burning content to a CD or DVD -- or even just moving content to an iPod.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Downloading qualifies as making?
Oh Brother!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
When one uses the term 'make/makes/making' it is traditionally considered to imply the original manufacturing process. However, in this particular case the judge(s) seem to have concluded that transferring content is tantamount to manufacturing the content.
To fix the situation, there should be different charges for the manufacture (making), the distribution (trafficking), and the possession of the illegal content. This provides a measured way of increasing the penalties, without charging someone with a crime he/she did not commit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why not just stiffen up penalties?
Just off the top of my head I could see this being used to charge the designers of P2P networks as contributors in Child Porn Rings. Or copying CD you own to use out side the house as distribution.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The article says BURNING is illegal, not DOWNLOADI
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The article says BURNING is illegal, not DOWNL
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The article says BURNING is illegal, not DOWNL
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
I fear for the future of the open Internet, and wonder if we're headed toward over-regulation and mis-application strangling the Internet into just another corporate tool.
I'd like to look back fondly at this time and say proudly "I was there for the birth of the Internet." However, it might be that we of this era cringe at the mention of the word, and die in shame for the sins of our time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
My $0.002
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dealing....
Or we could just go BDS on them
"In nomine patri, et filius, spiritus sancti"
Muhahahahaa.....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I just produced my first Metallica album!
woohoo!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]