QUOTE(dogbiscuit @ Sun 2nd May 2010, 5:40pm)
Possibly, but less likely, any person who viewed the inappropriate content and therefore has downloaded it onto their PC, and has not reported it.
Or viewed more than 3 images, even if they did report it. (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/wacko.gif)
QUOTE(dogbiscuit @ Sun 2nd May 2010, 5:40pm)
a) the FBI need to establish whether there is content that falls within the remit of that law.
It is not the job of the FBI to describe what content is legal and what content is illegal. It is the job of the law to do so, and to do so in a clear manner by which does not require a federal agency to interpret.
In any case, I highly doubt the FBI is going to engage in such an act of prior restraint.
QUOTE(dogbiscuit @ Sun 2nd May 2010, 5:40pm)
What is not appropriate is suggesting that it is wrong to report a possible crime.
And who do you believe is doing that?
I do think it is sometimes wrong to report a possible crime. But in this particular case, I don't think Sanger was wrong for reporting it. I do think he's wrong for publicizing his report in the manner that he did. I do think he's wrong for defending the particular law in question. I do think he's most likely wrong that there was a crime committed. I do think he's wrong for using the term "child pornography" (those he's admitted that error).