MaxPower Posted December 10, 2008 Report Share Posted December 10, 2008 Fake Simpsons cartoon is child porn, judge rules An internet cartoon showing characters modelled on Bart, Lisa and Maggie Simpson engaging in sex acts, is child pornography, a judge has ruled in a landmark case. In February at Sydney's Parramatta Local Court, Alan John McEwan was convicted of possessing child pornography and using his computer to access such material. He was fined $3,000 and required to enter a two-year good behaviour bond in relation to each offence. McEwan appealed against the conviction, but it was dismissed in the NSW Supreme Court, with Justice Michael Adams concluding a fictional cartoon character is a "person" within the meaning of Commonwealth and NSW laws. "The alleged pornography comprised a series of cartoons depicting figures modelled on members of the television animated series The Simpson," the judge said. "Sexual acts are depicted as being performed, in particular, by the "children" of the family. "The male figures have genitalia which is evidently human, as do the mother and the girl." He noted the figures made no pretence of imitating any actual, or fictional human beings. "In particular, the hands bear only four digits and the faces have eyes, a nose and mouth markedly and deliberately different to those of any possible human being," he said. The magistrate had rejected a submission that cartoon depictions or representations of fictional characters such as The Simpsons were not of "persons". Justice Adams said the legislation's main purpose was to combat the direct sexual exploitation and abuse of children that occurs where offensive images of real children are made. But, he said, it was also calculated to deter production of other material, including cartoons, which "can fuel demand for material that does involve the abuse of children". He upheld the magistrate's conclusion that the figures in the cartoons were depictions of persons within the meaning of the definitions in the laws. Justice Adams ordered each party to pay its own costs, as it was the first case dealing with the "difficult" issue. -AAP Source And I thought Australia was more open minded than this. But then, we ban certain video games because of content and our law makers won't even entertain the notion of an 18+ rating for video games. *sigh* * Oh I put this here instead of General TV because I thought it was more social commentary than anything else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 10, 2008 Report Share Posted December 10, 2008 I remember the U.S. went through this sort of thing not too long ago. I recall a bunch of hentai geeks were worried the government was going to arrest them for their... ahem.. "collections". Eventually it was seen as legal, mostly because there's no real "victim" in drawings. I don't know, it's a weird issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted December 10, 2008 Report Share Posted December 10, 2008 I heard about this yesterday and think it's ridiculous. There is no person being victimized. They are made up figures, and the only law being broken are trademarks. If anything it would be thought crime. You thought of it as children having sex, therefore you are arrested as if they were real kids. If that's pornography, then we shouldn't have any relations with Japan because of their "child porn" problem. They need to get to the problem of real kids being abused instead of this made up crap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James D. Posted December 10, 2008 Report Share Posted December 10, 2008 I heard about this yesterday and think it's ridiculous. There is no person being victimized. They are made up figures, and the only law being broken are trademarks. If anything it would be thought crime. You thought of it as children having sex, therefore you are arrested as if they were real kids. If that's pornography, then we shouldn't have any relations with Japan because of their "child porn" problem. They need to get to the problem of real kids being abused instead of this made up crap. Absolutely, 100% agree. You cannot put an age on a drawing of a fictional character. No one is being harmed. No one is victimized. As creepy and fucked up as the stuff is, I'd rather have some guy out there jerking off to a cartoon than to actual exploited children. Who knows, maybe it keeps them busy and keeps them from doing something heinous to a real person? The thing is, if you start throwing people in prison for cartoon porno, then you're going to see the prison population probably quintuple in the blink of an eye. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 10, 2008 Report Share Posted December 10, 2008 The thing is, if you start throwing people in prison for cartoon porno, then you're going to see the prison population probably quintuple in the blink of an eye. And who would run the site while Mike's in jail? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James D. Posted December 10, 2008 Report Share Posted December 10, 2008 In Mike's defense, Barbara Gordon and Maxima are most definitely not "underage". :angel: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 10, 2008 Report Share Posted December 10, 2008 Oh, I'm not talking child cartoon boobies. Just general cartoon boobies. Considering all the Eroge games I've played, I'd get locked up too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Robinson Posted December 10, 2008 Report Share Posted December 10, 2008 Hey, don't forget that the Australian goverment is hoping to introduce that mantadory internet filter at some point. I'm personally scared by stuff like this, we're open minded about so many things, and yet shit like this still happens. I mean, this kind of thing is disgusting, but it's a cartoon. Nobody is actually getting hurt by this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted December 10, 2008 Report Share Posted December 10, 2008 If you watch some cartoon woman getting raped by a tentacle monster, then under this decision shouldn't you be arrested for failure to report a crime? You see how fucking retarded that sounds? Thanks to this judge, it is a valid question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erin B. Posted December 10, 2008 Report Share Posted December 10, 2008 This is a sad, sad world we live in ladies and gentlemen. It makes me wanna cry to hear about such things. Does this mean next time we watch Homer try to strangle Bart, we should report it as child abuse? Or the next time Kenny gets killed, we need to report a murder? What has the world come to when cartoon characters are given more attention when there are real children out there that we deserve our attention, love, and support during what are the most disgusting, vile moments of their young lives. I beg of you, someone please think of the real children who need us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuaveStar Posted December 10, 2008 Report Share Posted December 10, 2008 This world gets dumber and dumber and gets closer and closer to one of my favourite catchphrases: Me: Am I really an insane man living in an insane world, or the last sane man alive living in an insane world? This is stupid, how about catching real criminals and putting them infront of a judge, not some horny 16-25 year old guy with too much free time! (I mean the guy who drew this. Just incase of confusion.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaxPower Posted December 10, 2008 Author Report Share Posted December 10, 2008 DAMN YOU AJR!!!! That fucking internet filter law gripes me to my bones!!! I wouldn't even care if it was a throw away line in the budget, but they want to put aside $260 fucking million dollars for it, and it's only going to have 1000 sites on it. When the last report I read stated there are 30 million pedo sites on the net, why spend $260 million on blocking 1000. But the worse thing, it's not even moderated (the list) it's at the discretion of the fucking government. So if they don't like you talking about a union free work place, they could block your blog. I thought the Labour/Left government were for freedom and the people? Fucking Rudd and his little Red/Rudd book. Fucking Commie! On topic, all posts are right, it's messed up that resources were used for this, it's messed up that you basically need to throw your kid off a bridge before child services are allowed to intervene, it's messed up that it's socially wrong to pay for sex, yet it's ok to get to 3am at a bar and go home with whoever is left (or more so than paying for it). Seriously, we are so stuck in the dark ages it's not funny. But to prove that, most media laws don't even cover the internet yet... I mean seriously. Not saying they should from a censorship point of view, but what of the monopoly, business side of things. Rupert Murdoch can only own 1 TV network/major newspaper, but if he wanted to(and could afford to), he could buy every single one of the top 10 websites and there isn't a law to stop that. I know 'top 10 website' is subjective, but you get my point... Yes, I'm drinking alone again and ranting on a message board. Hey at least I'm not being violent on the streets of the city Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothian Posted December 10, 2008 Report Share Posted December 10, 2008 But hey, at least you're good at sport! 'You' being Australia, rather than specifically 'you' Max Power. Can't add much more except that this decision is ridiculous. Hentai involving young characters is distasteful, but if the characters are fictional, there isn't the same sense of exploitation. At all. The idea that owning hentai makes you more likely to be a paedophile, or fuel demand for child pornography is at best a stretch, and at worst a terrible judgment upon internet users by the older generation whose lack of knowledge is now leading to needles criminal charges. Let's not forget outgoing Alaskan senator and convicted felon Ted Stevens, who, in his capacity as Head of the Senate Commerce Commitee, which regulates the internet, described hyperspace of being "a series of tubes". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kscriv Posted December 10, 2008 Report Share Posted December 10, 2008 But yeah, this is a stupid decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.