"Just looking": when does viewing online constitute possession?
Jonathan Clough
Abstract
Jonathan Clough
Abstract
Digital technology has greatly facilitated the production and distribution of child pornography, and in many jurisdictions it is an offense to possess child pornography. However, concepts of possession, which evolved in the context of tangible items, may be difficult to apply to digital images. One such issue arises where a defendant views child pornography online, but does not take active steps to download it. If such conduct does not constitute possession, then it may be possible for a person to view child pornography with impunity. This article discusses the nature of possession in the criminal law, and its application to digital images. The specific issue of “viewing as possession” is introduced, followed by an analysis of authorities considering this issue. It is argued that although the act of viewing online does constitute possession, the difficulties associated with proving such cases necessitates the enactment of an offense of accessing child pornography.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Digital technology has greatly facilitated the production and distribution of child pornography, and in many jurisdictions it is an offense to possess child pornography. However, concepts of possession, which evolved in the context of tangible items, may be difficult to apply to digital images. One such issue arises where a defendant views child pornography online, but does not take active steps to download it. If such conduct does not constitute possession, then it may be possible for a person to view child pornography with impunity. This article discusses the nature of possession in the criminal law, and its application to digital images. The specific issue of “viewing as possession” is introduced, followed by an analysis of authorities considering this issue. It is argued that although the act of viewing online does constitute possession, the difficulties associated with proving such cases necessitates the enactment of an offense of accessing child pornography.
Key concepts: Possession (linguistics), Child pornography, Pornography, The Internet, Internet privacy, Psychology, Context (archaeology), Law