Barbara Ellen doesn\’t seem to quite get it.
For me, this is what the George case has highlighted. She and her cronies were active abusers. However, armchair paedophiles are not committing a lesser crime. With this in mind, would it really be so hard to up the ante with these mouse-clicking cowards (huge fines, more thorough policing, blocking technology) to scare off the easily scared?
It\’s not that she has to be an expert in the law: but if she\’s going to write about it perhaps she might try finding out?
The act of putting an image into your browser is publication of that image. It isn\’t mere possession, or looking at it. It\’s publication (the legal argument runs that before you looked at it there was one copy of the image, on the server or your hard drive: while looking at it there are two. Hey presto, you\’ve published it).
It\’s exactly the same justification that reading an article on the internet is publication of that article in the jurisdiction where your browser, and you reading it, is.
In short, we already have ferocious laws about those who \”merely look at\” child pornography. Which, if you\’re going to write about how fiercely we should deal with those who \”merely look at\” child pornography, is arguably something you should know.