Freedom of speech is in retreat

Re:Freedom of speech is in retreat by simonh on Tuesday June 07, 2016 @11:25AM (#11855103)

I feel fine about them, thanks for asking. I think it's reasonable to make a distinction between those and images of sexual crimes on the basis of protecting the victims depicted in illegal pornography. Reportage also serves a valuable informative social purpose which images of sex crimes do not serve.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Freedom of speech is in retreat by Dylan16807 on Tuesday June 07, 2016 @11:48AM (#11855281)

What if the victims of the sex crime are dead (of natural causes)?

How about non-reporters using murder footage for some dumb purpose like background footage to their halloween album?

You can draw reasonable lines, but it's in a very different place from "depicts a crime yes/no".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Freedom of speech is in retreat by simonh on Tuesday June 07, 2016 @12:00PM (#11855364)

> What if the victims of the sex crime are dead (of natural causes)?

Still ok to ban it. Clearly I am putting pornography in a different category from other forms of images and 'speech' but I'm comfortable doing so.

> How about non-reporters using murder footage for some dumb purpose like background footage to their halloween album?

Fine.

> You can draw reasonable lines, but it's in a very different place from "depicts a crime yes/no".

I agree. Depicting crimes isn't the problem, there's the issue of preventing incitement and blocking avenues for funding criminal activities. Pornography is so particularly and differently vulnerable to these abuses that I think special treatment under the law is reasonable.

[ Parent | on HN ]