Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 31
  1. #1
    Stealth epicurean! skade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Province
    Texas
    Oratio
    4,024

    Ignore User

    'Simpsons' sex toon is child porn

    http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/latest/...ld-porn-judge/

    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 Australian case.


    In February at Sydney's Parramatta Local Court, Alan John McEwen 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.


    McEwen appealed against the conviction, but it was dismissed in the NSW Supreme Court on Monday, 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.
    I'm no legal expert, but doesn't giving the status of a person to an animated figure seem to go too far?
    Last edited by skade; December 9th, 2008 at 05:41 PM.


 

  • #2
    It opens a precedent against a lot of Rule34 sites out there.

  • #3
    I want watermelon! Bagpuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    Liverpool, UK
    Oratio
    8,230

    Ignore User
    Porngraphic cartoons involving cartoon children are already illegal in the UK.

    Although in this case at least the jury were told they should convict if they concluded that a picture looked like a photo.
    Last edited by Bagpuss; December 9th, 2008 at 12:43 PM.

  • #4
    I want watermelon! Bagpuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    Liverpool, UK
    Oratio
    8,230

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Klaus View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member.
    It opens a precedent against a lot of Rule34 sites out there.
    Forget them, if it is illegal to have a picture of Bart Simpson having sex, because he is a "person" and the Judge is boarding the definition of person, because Justice Adams says the laws aims to deter the production of material, including cartoons, that could "fuel demand for material that does involve the abuse of children".

    Then what about Grand Theft Auto, and other violent games, they are a lot more life like than a cartoon of Bart Simpson. Are these now snuff movies? Are they illegal because they fuel a demand for murder and robbery? Or worse have I committed murder by killing a virtual person?

    Also since in the Simpson movie you see Bart naked does that film now class as Child-porn? Shit I've seen that movie, I must be a paedophile.

    Hardcore porn follows.
    Spoiler:
    Last edited by Bagpuss; December 9th, 2008 at 01:05 PM.

  • #5
    space bunny! Scarbonac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    It is a Mystery.
    Oratio
    2,780

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Bagpuss View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member.
    Forget them, if it is illegal to have a picture of Bart Simpson having sex, because he is a "person" and the Judge is boarding the definition of person, because Justice Adams says the laws aims to deter the production of material, including cartoons, that could "fuel demand for material that does involve the abuse of children".

    Then what about Grand Theft Auto, and other violent games, they are a lot more life like than a cartoon of Bart Simpson. Are these now snuff movies? Are they illegal because they fuel a demand for murder and robbery? Or worse have I committed murder by killing a virtual person?

    Also since in the Simpson movie you see Bart naked does that film now class as Child-porn? Shit I've seen that movie, I must be a paedophile.

    Hardcore porn follows.
    Spoiler:

    Thoughtcrime! Thoughtcrime! Thoughtcrime!
    Asimbonanga.

  • #6
    The supreme court is going to knock this down if nothing else. Drawn pictures of kids having sex has been consistently ruled as legal by the supreme court.

  • #7
    I want watermelon! Bagpuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    Liverpool, UK
    Oratio
    8,230

    Ignore User
    That's the Supreme Court in Australia right?

  • #8
    It shouldn't surprise anyone that this would happen in Australia or any other police state.

  • #9
    The ENNIE Award Winning... kiznit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    Xanadu
    Oratio
    17,605

    Ignore User
    Yup, when I started reading the OP, I was like, "I bet this is in Australia".

  • #10
    Giant Farting Camel God!
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Province
    Brisbane Australia
    Oratio
    871

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by El Cid View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member.
    It shouldn't surprise anyone that this would happen in Australia or any other police state.
    Ok, it is 5:58am here in Australia and I am not awake yet, but we are a police state?
    Quote Originally Posted by kiznit View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member.
    Yup, when I started reading the OP, I was like, "I bet this is in Australia".
    Why? Maybe I am missing something.

  • #11
    Lieutenant Dummy Stupid-Butt Ftumch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    The corner barstool
    Oratio
    22,347

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by kiznit View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member.
    Yup, when I started reading the OP, I was like, "I bet this is in Australia".
    My first thought was Mississippi.
    ---In real life, vampires only sparkle when they're on fire.

  • #12
    How can a reasonable person decipher the age of a cartoon?

    How long has the Simpsons been on, anyway? Isn't Bart pushing 30?
    .
    .
    .
    .
    'I wish you all had one neck and that I had my hands on it.'

  • #13
    Stage Name: Jackie! COMMUNITY SUPPORTER Nerfherder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    Nordschleife, Nürburgring
    Oratio
    22,705

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Jakar View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member.
    Ok, it is 5:58am here in Australia and I am not awake yet, but we are a police state?
    I thought that traditionally the UK was thought of as the police state, and Australia as the open prison
    Robin Williams: "In England, if you commit a crime, the police don't have a gun and you don't have a gun. If you commit a crime, the police will say, 'Stop, or I'll say stop again.'"

    PWD: "you're the seed, the relationship is the soil, and the love and attention and work you put into the relationship is the sun and the rain that feeds it. What grows from that is what you always were meant to become."

  • #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Bagpuss View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member.
    Also since in the Simpson movie you see Bart naked does that film now class as Child-porn? Shit I've seen that movie, I must be a paedophile.
    Do you think nudity equals porn? Did it make you feel sexually aroused? Do you think it was placed there to cause sexual arousal?

    I have no idea how what the "real" purpose of the cartoon was, nor do I know how it looked like. But maybe it was aimed at pedophiles? Maybe it was implying sexual acts among children, and not just some joke cartoon?
    To figure this out, I would have to research further and I am too lazy for that.

  • #15
    I want watermelon! Bagpuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    Liverpool, UK
    Oratio
    8,230

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Mustrum_Ridcully View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member.
    Do you think nudity equals porn? Did it make you feel sexually aroused?
    Nope but it is evident that in previous cases the law (in some countries) does when it involves children.

    Do you think it was placed there to cause sexual arousal?
    My opinion doesn't really matter. It would be the prosecutors, judge and jury's opinion. The Simpson's movie it was there for comic effect, but there have been cases of perfectly innocent pictures of real children that have lead to prosecutions. The judge has said in this case cartoons are "people" too. Hence even a humorous image of Bart's cock leaves you open to prosecution.

    The important part of this case is the judge has set a president that artificial images (not even accurate ones) of people count as people in the eyes of the law. That is likely to have repercussions beyond this one case.

    "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."

    Seems cartoons are people in Australia. [Insert joke about Roger Rabbit here.]
    Last edited by Bagpuss; December 9th, 2008 at 10:51 PM.

  • Tags for this Thread

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •