Dude
When you steal a file from a computer it's not necessarily deleted from the computer like when you take a physical book from a bookstore.
With the book analogy, it's like borrowing the book from the library, reading it, then returning. You want to read it again? It's still there if you want it.
Agreeing with Cyo on this one.
Your point about child porn isn't quite right, because you're in possession of those images in the country where it's illegal. Accessing them, even without saving them is still a criminal offence even though the pictures are hosted in a country where it's not illegal or whatever.
But I think this side steps the point. The issue's you've raised are more about why it's impossible to regulate rather than why regulation should or shouldn't happen in the first place. I know for some people the impossibility is a reason why regulation should be abandoned, but it shouldn't be the only reason.
Actually, what I was going for was an understanding that a person who views something illegal, even if it may be legal where its hosted, IS breaking the law. I was attempting to make the point that it's easier to sidestep the rules without getting caught at the moment.
I was not trying to imply that the person sitting in their worry free because it's legal elsewhere. Sorry if I wasn't clear.
You final point is confusing. You can't censor the internet without first making the person behind the content accountable. Well.. that's not true, you can of course filter content like China and Iran do so that people in that country can't access certain pages. Is that what you meant? Content filtering vs prosecuting the criminals behind the content?
THIS is the point I'm trying to make. In the end, when I hear "Censor the internet," I'm thinking along the lines of what China is doing to their people. I would not necessarily consider it censorship to disconnect and seize servers that are hosting content that is illegal in that particular country.
I'm drawing the line in the debate as
"Censoring the internet" implies that either all the countries get together and decide what is not acceptable content for the internet, or that countries take an approach like China's wherein all sites hosting inappropriate content will be blocked from the country.
"Punishing criminals" is the more sensible approach. Finding the people who are using the internet to break the laws of their own country and punishing them appropriately.
If a man is allowed to own what is considered "child pornography" in his own country, and is allowed to disseminate it as he pleases, he should have the right to do so on the internet. He should not be held liable because some wanker in another country decided to break the law and view his content.
I do hope I made myself more clear.
Oh, and P.S. ... just because I'm playing Devil's Advocate for child pornographers does not mean I support or approve of what they do. It's an easy topic point because a solid majority of the people here would say "that is inappropriate" and it serves as a good baseline for a censorship discussion.
Edited by jcrboy, 18 August 2009 - 04:37 AM.
