News1 min ago
4 Years For Nazi Who Downloaded Terror Handbook
https:/
One thing I’ve noticed is that I read about people convicted of child porn, terrorism etc.. have DOWNLOADED offensive material so my question here is then is it legal to browse and read offensive material in which it only becomes a crime once it has been DOWNLOADED?
What’s the difference?
One thing I’ve noticed is that I read about people convicted of child porn, terrorism etc.. have DOWNLOADED offensive material so my question here is then is it legal to browse and read offensive material in which it only becomes a crime once it has been DOWNLOADED?
What’s the difference?
Answers
1 to 5 of 5
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Minkyme. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
If you read something online (such as what I'm typing now) you've actually downloaded that content to your computer (or other device) anyway.
However the legislation relating to terrorism doesn't refer to 'downloading'; it only refers to 'possession' and to 'collection of information'. Sections 57 and 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000 apply:
https:/
The material downloaded in the case your link refers to was The Big Book of Mischief, which has always only existed in the darker places of the internet. However many prosecutions in such cases seem to refer to The Anarchist's Cookbook, which originally existed in a print version and was even promoted as a Fathers' Day gift by W H Smith (who also pushed sales of it at Christmas). I've even seen it on sale, fairly recently, in a charity shop. So it's hardly a secret underground publication!
The Protection of Children Act 1978 (as amended) [together with Section 160 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988] doesn't refer to 'downloading' either. It only refers to 'taking', 'making' or 'possessing' indecent images.
(There is also separate legislation, Section 62 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, which deals with possession of 'prohibited images' which are non-photographic in their natures, such as drawing and paintings. However that requires that images must be 'pornographic', rather than just 'indecent', for an offence to occur).
In such cases simply (intentionally) viewing an indecent image of a child on a website (without actually saving it) is an offence because a court has ruled it to constitute 'making' an image. [(R v Jayson (2002)].
However the legislation relating to terrorism doesn't refer to 'downloading'; it only refers to 'possession' and to 'collection of information'. Sections 57 and 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000 apply:
https:/
The material downloaded in the case your link refers to was The Big Book of Mischief, which has always only existed in the darker places of the internet. However many prosecutions in such cases seem to refer to The Anarchist's Cookbook, which originally existed in a print version and was even promoted as a Fathers' Day gift by W H Smith (who also pushed sales of it at Christmas). I've even seen it on sale, fairly recently, in a charity shop. So it's hardly a secret underground publication!
The Protection of Children Act 1978 (as amended) [together with Section 160 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988] doesn't refer to 'downloading' either. It only refers to 'taking', 'making' or 'possessing' indecent images.
(There is also separate legislation, Section 62 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, which deals with possession of 'prohibited images' which are non-photographic in their natures, such as drawing and paintings. However that requires that images must be 'pornographic', rather than just 'indecent', for an offence to occur).
In such cases simply (intentionally) viewing an indecent image of a child on a website (without actually saving it) is an offence because a court has ruled it to constitute 'making' an image. [(R v Jayson (2002)].
" If you read something online (such as what I'm typing now) you've actually downloaded that content to your computer (or other device) anyway. "
MM, not sure I would entirely agree with that. IMHO downloaded implies saved and pages such as this are simply interpreted by your browser direct from a server and not saved locally(apart from cookies).
MM, not sure I would entirely agree with that. IMHO downloaded implies saved and pages such as this are simply interpreted by your browser direct from a server and not saved locally(apart from cookies).
-- answer removed --
'taking', 'making' or 'possessing' indecent images, i think that a misnomer surely if you went to such a site and viewed said images
you have in fact downloaded the illegal material, disgusting as it is
perhaps new judge could clarify, example the sun page three back in the day..16yr old models would be illegal in some countries.
you have in fact downloaded the illegal material, disgusting as it is
perhaps new judge could clarify, example the sun page three back in the day..16yr old models would be illegal in some countries.
1 to 5 of 5
Latest Posts
ChatterBank8 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles10 mins ago
Food & Drink22 mins ago
Crosswords24 mins ago
Technology50 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.