VIRTUAL PORNOGRAPHY

Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition

This case is the act of fighting for the freedom of speech by a group of adult-entertainment trade association as stated in the United states First Amendment. The first amendment stated that the Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

With the expanded on the federal prohibition on child pornography by The Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 (CPPA) to include not only pornography images made using actual children, but also "any visual depiction, including any phototgraph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture" that "is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct." and any sexually explicit image that is “advertised, promoted, presented, described, or distributed in such a manner that conveys the impression” it depicts “a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct.” Hence, a range of sexually explicit images, sometimes called “virtual child pornography,” that appear to depict minors but were produced by means other than using real children, such as through the use of youthful-looking adults or computer-imaging technology is ban by the CPPA. The law is aimed at preventing the production or distribution of pornographic material pandered as child pornography.

Personal Opinion:

The case interprets that, artistic drawings could influence such act of child pornography. for example, any drawings of a child without their clothes on would eventually be share across the cyberspace. The worries of such art is when this drawing would be use in a wrongly manner, especially by a pedophile, even though no actual child is used for such drawing. The question is, would stopping such artistic action would eventually stop such child pornographic?

In my point of view, such drawing would not stop entirely on child pornography, yet, it is apart of the sources of such activities. To stop artist from doing what they do would disturb their income making. But then again, it is also depending on the country's culture, whether it is acceptable such drawing to be publish or out in the market. as in the case of Miller v. California, as long there are no obscenity in the art and it does not gives such sexually or offensive way addressed, there should not be any issue on banning such act, which in the context of United States. Different laws commence differently depending on the country, states or regions.