This article is more than 1 year old

Cartoon smut law to make life sucky for Olympic organisers

Internet + iffy logo = Ha ha!

In the first instance, any image claiming to be "child porn" is evidence of child abuse, and those possessing such images are considered to be fuelling the trade for such material by creating an economic demand for it. In the second instance, one of the justifications for the new law was the harm being done to participants in extreme pornographic images, or the presumed harm that might result from copycatting.

In this case, the view was expressed that copycatting might be an issue. However, both in the committee stage of this legislation and in the consultation paper (pdf) advocating it, there was also a strong inclination toward punishing individuals on the basis of their proclivities, irrespective of harm done, or even potential for copycatting.

The law will apply where "the impression conveyed by the image is that the person shown is a child". In debate in committee, those arguing for the law were clear that they hoped it would apply even to a few lines scrawled by an individual on a piece of paper for their own enjoyment: and Government Minister Maria Eagle wanted the widest possible interpretation of the law to prevent individuals adding alien characteristics to images, and claiming they were not human.

Given how widespread is the belief in the indecent nature of the Olympic logo, some degree of public embarrassment seems inevitable. First, because the internet is home to what can best be described as an "awkward squad" tendency which does not much like increased regulation of what can be seen and downloaded from the web, this issue is a gift: an opportunity to stick two fingers up at what is seen by many as a legislative step too far.

Second, given the number of individuals who subscribe to groups on this subject, the likelihood that someone will formally complain to the police cannot be ruled out - and there could well be a case to answer. The "strict liability" nature of the law coupled with widespread publicity over this image means that there may be no room for the ignorance defence.

El Reg asked various government bodies for a comment. The Ministry of Justice said it could not help: it was responsible for policy, but how a law would be used in future was a matter for police and Crown Prosecution Service.

The latter was equally unable to help, as although the law has received Royal Assent, it has not yet been "commenced" - that is, it still requires a Minister of State to sign it into active status - and therefore no guidelines have yet been issued. However, it is expected that that will happen in the next few months.

We approached the Olympic Organising Committee for comment. A London 2012 spokesperson said: “The London 2012 logo depicts the figure 2012 and nothing else.” ®

More about

TIP US OFF

Send us news


Other stories you might like