Viewing images possession?

[Psionicist]

Article: http://news.mywebpal.com/news_tool_...&pnpID=730&NewsID=639021&CategoryID=3511&on=1

Above article is interesting because all of us use the Internet. If your cache is ruled to be your possession it can be very unsafe to use the Internet in the future, because you have no control of it. You didn't know this thread would contain the image below for example. And now when it's downloaded and painted on the screen you have viewed it. Tricky situation.

The article raises a few interesting questions. Do you think files in the browser cache or attachments in e-mail downloaded by your e-mail client should be considered possession (in the law sense)? Do you think it should be illegal at all to view pictures or read text on the Internet?

Cheers

 

[Angel Tarragon]

What a jip!

 

[Hand of Evil]

a slippy slope.

 

[Angel Tarragon]

a slippy slope.

or a slopey slippey!

 

[IronWolf]

The article raises a few interesting questions. Do you think files in the browser cache or attachments in e-mail downloaded by your e-mail client should be considered possession (in the law sense)? Do you think it should be illegal at all to view pictures or read text on the Internet?

Because it is way too easy to have things show up in your cache unintentionally or someone emailing you files without you having requested it I think outlawing it is going a little far. If someone had it in for you it would be way too easy for someone to "pollute" your temporary internet files or email you "suspect" items and then try to turn you in.

It would make more sense to look for images or items that had been actually downloaded to the machine. Even a fewer number of those would hold more weight in my mind than what was in the temp internet files.

But then you get into the whole "My computer was hacked, I didn't put those there." excuse. In fact didn't someone try to use that line once when caught with incriminating items?

Take someone's home PC running an unsecured FTP server. Are they really going to be help liable when the warez crowd starts using their machine to host the pirated software?

 

[Umbran]

Do you think it should be illegal at all to view pictures or read text on the Internet?

Illegal text is a bit harder to come by, so we'll set that aside for a moment...

Illegal pictures are a bit easier - there are some that probably need to be illegal, since you have to victimize and abuse people to get them. Child pornography being the big example.

From there - well, if you don't make it illegal on perhaps the easiest system to view and distribute the things, you might as well not make it illegal at all. If it has to be illegal, it has to be illegal on the internet, too.

While frequently posession implies intent, there's probably some room for reason. Having the offending material exist only in your cache would be out of character for your typical offender. Having it's presence in your cache be the only evidence against you would again, be atypical. After all, it's is easier to eliminate it from your cache than just about anywhere else, since your browser has a "clear cache" function.

Your defense would basically be - "sir, they didn't find the offending material anywhere else. Nor have I any other connection to it. If I am so bright to eliminate all other connections to this, wouldn't I be bright enough to empty my cache?" That goes pretty well to "reasonable doubt" right there. And the prosecutor knows it, and so probably wouldn't hold you merely for having stuff in your cache.

 

[IronWolf]

While frequently posession implies intent, there's probably some room for reason. Having the offending material exist only in your cache would be out of character for your typical offender. Having it's presence in your cache be the only evidence against you would again, be atypical. After all, it's is easier to eliminate it from your cache than just about anywhere else, since your browser has a "clear cache" function.

Very well spoken Umbran (as usual). I am leery of a law saying your browser's cache is in your possession. Like you have said, if the images exist in the cache alone it probably means very little. Innocent until proven guilty, so let the prosecuting attorney's come up with something more solid than images in a browser cache.

 

[Turanil]

 

[Angel Tarragon]

ROFL!!!! Thats too funny, Turanil!

 

[Umbran]

I am leery of a law saying your browser's cache is in your possession.

I am not too leery of such a law, for the reasons given above. The fact that it is on the books does not mean you're at all likely to go to jail for it alone. The idea is instead to give law enforcement a greater array of tools at their disposal in order to nail someone who is doing other things.

Take seatbelt laws, for example. Typically, a cop can't tell if you are wearing a seatbelt as you go by a speed trap at 55 mph. If, however, you're doing 90mph, and he pulls you over, and sees you aren't wearing a seatbelt, then you just jacked up your fine...