Posted: Sep 11, 2012 3:00 pm
NilsGLindgren wrote:Odd that this surfaces now - it relates to what he said in a blogg and in an interview in 2010. And no, it is not correctly understood, apparently. What he did rant against was, in fact, bizarre results that could be the outcome of the laws agaisnt child pornography - he claimed that it would be a (legal) possibility to put somebody in jail for being the owner of photos of him/herself, naked, if under the age of 16. There were other examples, such as, pictures of yourself bathing naked with the kids, or being naked in a sauna, etc. It also related to the laws governing the storage of digital data (he is a founding member of Piratpartiet - arrrh, shipmates) who are, on the whole, against any legislation in regards to things like, who downloads what from whom.
So far noone, to my knowledge, has been charged with possessing child pornography on the grounds of being the owner of pictures of him/herself bathing in a tin bucket at the age of 3, and, I would guess that the law does not really mean to cover that posssibility.
Source criticism - apparently, even rational skeptics need it. Good thing you pointed that out. Doubt anyone learned anything from it, though.