Free Speech trumps `virtual' child porn; a high-court ruling striking down a federal law that criminalized `virtual' child pornography is a major setback for the Justice Department antiporn efforts

0 Comments | Insight on the News, May 27, 2002 | by Kelly Patricia O'Meara

Gramm continues: "You have to distinguish between what is on the World Wide Web and what is on AOL. It is AOL's policy not to allow pornographic Websites on the AOL service, but AOL is not the Web. The Supreme Court ruling doesn't change how we address issues of pornography on our service. It has been, is, and always will be a violation of our service agreement to post, display or trade any kind of pornographic material on the AOL service."

Regardless of the agreements and policies, the first problem for ISPs and law enforcement is identifying the child-pornography sites. Then, given the high quality of digital photography and computer manipulation of images, it is becoming increasingly difficult to tell the difference between what is real-life child porn and what is virtual. With an estimated 260 new pornographic Websites being posted worldwide every day, law enforcement will have its hands full just identifying the sites, let alone sorting out which are real.

Within days of the Supreme Court decision, Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.) announced new legislation that again would ban virtual child pornography. During a press conference unveiling the "Child Obscenity and Pornography Prevention Act of 2002," Foley declared: "The high court, in siding with pedophiles over children, forced us into action. This legislation is a pedophile's worst nightmare."

KELLY PATRICIA O'MEARA IS AN INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER FOR Insight MAGAZINE.