Mon 16th April 2012, 9:13pm
QUOTE(Detective @ Mon 16th April 2012, 8:35pm)
QUOTE(Web Fred @ Mon 16th April 2012, 7:58pm)
perhaps there are worse places to put them than Commons.
Unlikely, because they are easy to find there and can be freely re-used even in the unlikely event that the sort of site that might re-use them is worried about copyright.
Context and usage is every thing.
OK, so if they're re-used in a pro-paedophile article or an article on some particularly revolting sexula practice that will be fine?
Actually it's the opposite.
Used in an educational context then they are fine, used for paedo porn, not fine.
Pornography is in the eye of the beholder, not necessarily the publisher.
For example, there was an image mentioned in another thread a few days ago, where there were three little 'uns nekkid and covered in mud. In my eyes, ie the eyes of a parent, the photograph was very cute, perfectly harmless and was not sexually oriented in any way and a perfectly wonderful image of three beautiful little children which just exuded innocence. But because of the way the world is now, partly due to prudery, partly due to knee-jerk reactions, partly due to media incitement and partly due to the sick demands of paedophiles this beautiful picture is now deemed to be "child porn".