News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Google’s Role In Woodland Child Pornography Arrest Raises... by arrrg on Sunday November 24, 2013 @02:33PM (#6790738)
Victimless crime?

How about you ask those who were abused whether they feel like they are not victimised by people spreading and owning images of their abuse.

The victims are quite obviously real.

Re:Google’s Role In Woodland Child Pornography Arrest Raises... by Houshalter on Sunday November 24, 2013 @02:39PM (#6790766)
For the most part the victims are anonymous and will never know whether the photo is spreading unless they themselves go to the darker places of the internet.

I see your point, but looking at a photo of someone without their permission is vastly different than raping them.

Re:Google’s Role In Woodland Child Pornography Arrest Raises... by arrrg on Sunday November 24, 2013 @02:48PM (#6790798)
So you think it should only be a crime if the victims know about it? That seems like a weird and unnecessary wrinkle. And I don’t think most victims have to go to “darker places of the internet” to know, given that they were present when the abuse took place and was filmed/photographed.

I would also like to know when I said that raping a child and looking at images of said rape are equivalent crimes.

Also, it’s looking at an image of someone being abused, not just an image of someone.

Re:Google’s Role In Woodland Child Pornography Arrest Raises... by anonymoushn on Sunday November 24, 2013 @06:06PM (#6791597)
Are all CP images images of abuse? For instance, if two teenagers film themselves having sex, are they both abusing each other?