They are, of course, failing to answer the question of why encouraging people to consume _computer-generated_ child pornography should be considered a justification for legal intervention, not to mention that such an effort would also make putting _Lolita_ on the Internet illegal (text could drive up demand for it as well, after all), or even political speech such as from NAMBLA. (It's political speech just as much as material from neo-Nazis... or from the Demopublicans.)
I don't see what the FBI is complaining about. Child pornography traded on the net makes produces of child pornography incredibly easy to locate. The child porn peddlers and consumers caught on the network are usually soft, chewy and coperative, responding well to all manner of threats and inducements. Further the piracy in child pornography tends to create a buyers market, drives prices down substantially, reducing the incentive to produce original material at all. -- "Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies, The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - C.S. Lewis, _God in the Dock_ +---------------------+--------------------+----------------------------------+ |Julian Assange RSO | PO Box 2031 BARKER | Secret Analytic Guy Union | |proff@suburbia.net | VIC 3122 AUSTRALIA | finger for PGP key hash ID = | |proff@gnu.ai.mit.edu | FAX +61-3-98199066 | 0619737CCC143F6DEA73E27378933690 | +---------------------+--------------------+----------------------------------+