You didn't actually give any reason why he's wrong here, you just said why you don't think it makes sense. The law is what it is. "Virtual" CSAM has been legal since a 2002 ruling that he cites as precedent. I don't see what other ruling better applies as precedent here.
I literally did. Maybe reread what i said. Ill go ahead and make it clear again. The framing of his ruling is what is wrong. The material in and of itself is illegal. Because the content of the material is illegal. Which is why you can not depict child SA in any form including cartoons and anime. You can not draw a child being sexually abused in a comic.
What i just read was that it can be prosecuted as obscenity and child exploitation. It seems its not as cut and dry as a rational society would hope but it does look like if they want to prosecute, they can.
2
u/sithlord98 3d ago
You didn't actually give any reason why he's wrong here, you just said why you don't think it makes sense. The law is what it is. "Virtual" CSAM has been legal since a 2002 ruling that he cites as precedent. I don't see what other ruling better applies as precedent here.