Do you know it when you see it? Using Alaska’s child pornography statute as a nationwide model for proscribing morphed images
This Note explores the relationship between free speech jurisprudence and the harm that morphed images pose to children, arguing that Alaska’s child pornography statute is a promising model for other states to address the threat that digital child pornography poses. However, this Note concludes that...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Alaska Law Review
2021
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/11212/5305 https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1609&context=alr |
| Summary: | This Note explores the relationship between free speech jurisprudence and the harm that morphed images pose to children, arguing that Alaska’s child pornography statute is a promising model for other states to address the threat that digital child pornography poses. However, this Note concludes that pornographic material must be intrinsically related to child abuse to justify its prohibition. Accordingly, this Note argues that while a state statutory ban on materials that rely exclusively on digital doctoring is likely unconstitutional, the Alaska statute prohibiting pornographic images that involve the digital editing of an identifiable child’s face onto an adult’s body is constitutional. Other states should thus follow Alaska’s example and enact a statutory ban on morphed images to ensure efforts to protect children keep pace with technological advancement. |
|---|