I think you're mis-reading 65/8Specifically if an image of an imaginary child is found to be 'child porn' then it will be treated in exactly the same way as an image of a real child.
So some of Dave's work (which thankfully I haven't seen, but have heard mentioned) probably is covered under this act.
So everyone who browsed this site and has one of his images in there cache should be mildly concerned.
(So some of Dave's work (which thankfully I haven't seen, but have heard mentioned) probably is covered under this act.
So everyone who browsed this site and has one of his images in there cache should be mildly concerned.
Ghoti Fingers,
Thu 29 Aug 2013, 23:20,
archived)