CyberLaw Blog

Archive for the ‘Manga’ Category

Could you get arrested for owning a graphic novel? | Coffee House

Wednesday, 28th January 2009
Could you get arrested for owning a graphic novel?
William Blackstock 5:27pm

Film adaptations of graphic novels such as Zack Snyder’s 300 and the upcoming Watchmen mean that graphic novels are growing ever more popular. They’re not just in dingy comic book shops anymore but on the shelves in Waterstones and Borders. So is it right that they are now under threat by government anti-pornography legislation?

There are two bills in parliament at the moment that, if successful, could make the possession of ‘extreme pornographic images’ an offence.

An ‘extreme image’ is defined in The Criminal Justice and Immigration Act as one that is ‘grossly offensive, disgusting or otherwise of an obscene character’. So far, so good, right? That all sounds normal enough, but there¹s a sting in the tail for unsuspecting readers of the graphic novel: ‘and a reasonable person looking at the image would think that any such person or animal was real.’ There¹s a similar set of rules for child pornography. So, in a nutshell, if it looks like it¹s real (i.e. it¹s well drawn), then you can be prosecuted for owning it.

Fans of Frank Miller’s Sin City probably have little to fear; his stark high-contrast black and white panels are explicitly violent yet a far cry from ‘realistic’. If, on the other hand, you prefer Alan Moore¹s Lost Girls or even Neil Gaiman¹s Sandman, you may be in for a shock. In an interview with MTV here, Gaiman said (of the similar US PROTECT Act):

‘I wrote a story about a serial killer who kidnaps and rapes children, and then murders them, we did that as a comic, not for the purposes of titillation or anything like that, but if you bought that comic, you could be arrested for it? That¹s just deeply wrong. Nobody was hurt. The only thing that was hurt were ideas.’

I¹ve read the story and it¹s not as explicit as Sin City; is written extremely well; and, even more important than that, is necessary in order to understand the world of Sandman.

Works like Lost Girls really blur the line. Alan Moore¹s story of Alice (from Alice in Wonderland), Wendy (from Peter Pan) and Dorothy (from The Wizard of Oz) talking together of their sexual exploits as adults in 1913 is filled with rich, beautiful language and wonderfully illustrated by Melinda Gebbie but it is erotic in content (Moore himself goes further, saying deliberately that it is ‘pornography’ and rejecting the ‘erotica’ label). It is also, in places, quite uncomfortable to read. But then a huge part of the point of literature, erotic or otherwise, is to challenge our expectations of what is acceptable and what is not.

For the government to step in and say what we can and cannot own, to define the morality of art in that way, is both ludicrous and impossible; especially when it concerns entirely fictional situations with equally fictional artwork.

And where will it all end? If Alan Moore can be censored, then why not Angela Carter or James Joyce in a few bills’ time? Why not Renaissance art? Much better, I think, to let the individual choose what they want to see or read and to censor things for themselves.

U.S. Appeals Court Upholds 1st CP-Anime Conviction Under PROTECT Act – XBIZ.com

By Rhett Pardon, Saturday, Dec 20, 2008

RICHMOND, Va — A federal appeals panel has affirmed the first child-porn cartoon conviction under the PROTECT Act.

A 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel voted to dismiss the appeal of Dwight Whorley of Richmond, who is serving 20 years in prison for using a public computer for jobseekers at the Virginia Employment Commission to receive 20 anime images.

The illustrated images depicted young girls being forced to have sex with men.

Whorley also received digital photographs of actual children engaging in sexual conduct and sent and received emails graphically describing parents sexually molesting their children.

A Virginia jury previously convicted Whorley of 74 counts, including receiving obscene materials, receiving obscene visual representations of the sexual abuse of children, receiving child pornography and sending and receiving obscene emails describing the sexual abuse of children.

Whorley’s federal public defender Rob Wagner argued that child-porn cartoons, or anime, is protected under the 1st Amendment because it does not depict real children and claimed the statute is unconstitutional because text-only emails cannot be obscene.

Judges Paul V. Niemeyer and James P. Jones rejected those arguments, but Judge Gregory agreed with Whorley on those issues but joined the majority in affirming his convictions on the counts pertaining to photographs.

‘Because 18 U.S.C. § 1462 punishes trafficking in commerce, not the mere possession of obscene materials, and ‘receives’ has a uniform meaning that is readily understood, we reject Whorley’s facial challenges,’ the court ruled. ‘We also reject his arguments that textual matter cannot be obscene under § 1462 and that cartoons depicting minors in sexually explicit conduct must depict real-life minors to violate 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a)(1). Finally, we reject his challenges to the district court’s procedural rulings and his sentence.’

Niemeyer noted in the majority opinion that the statute under which Whorley was convicted, the PROTECT Act of 2003, clearly states that ‘it is not a required element of any offense under this section that the minor depicted actually exists.’

Much of the evidence in the case was received by court order from Yahoo because Whorley used the search engine to seek out child cartoon images.

‘At trial, evidence from the [Virginia Employment Commission] computer showed that Whorley conducted numerous searches on March 11 and 12, 2004, through the Yahoo search engine, using the query ‘child sex play,’’ the court said. ‘The pictures of the naked children obtained from those searches came from an Illinois website called Logical Reality.

‘It also showed that on March 30, 2004, Whorley obtained the 20 Japanese cartoons from a site called Fractal Underground Studio. On the same day, he sought eight times to open sites that had been blocked on the commission’s computers.’

Federal public defender Rob Wagner, who represents the 55-year-old Whorley, said he would ask the full appeals court to reconsider the three-year-old case.

Whorley previously was sentenced to 46 months in prison for a 1999 child pornography conviction.

View the Court decision here

The Associated Press: Child porn cartoon conviction upheld in Va.Child porn cartoon conviction upheld in Va.

By LARRY O’DELL – 20 December, 2008

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — Child pornography is illegal even if the pictures are drawn, a federal appeals panel said in affirming the nation’s first conviction under a 2003 federal law against such cartoons.

Dwight Whorley of Richmond is serving 20 years in prison, convicted in 2005 of using a public computer for jobseekers at the Virginia Employment Commission to receive 20 Japanese cartoons, called anime, illustrating young girls being forced to have sex with men. Whorley also received digital photographs of actual children engaging in sexual conduct and sent and received e-mails graphically describing parents sexually molesting their children.

A three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday upheld his conviction.

Among the arguments in his appeal was that cartoons are protected under the First Amendment because they do not depict real children. He also claimed the statute is unconstitutional because text-only e-mails cannot be obscene.

Two judges rejected those arguments. A third agreed with Whorley on those issues but joined the majority in affirming his convictions on the counts pertaining to photographs.

Judge Paul V. Niemeyer noted in the majority opinion that the statute under which Whorley was convicted, the PROTECT Act of 2003, clearly states that ‘it is not a required element of any offense under this section that the minor depicted actually exists.’

Rob Wagner, the federal public defender who represented Whorley, said he was ‘very disappointed’ with the ruling and that he would ask the full appeals court to reconsider. If that fails, Wagner said he will petition the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case.

A Virginia jury convicted Whorley of 74 counts including receiving obscene materials, receiving obscene visual representations of the sexual abuse of children, receiving child pornography and sending and receiving obscene e-mails describing the sexual abuse of children.

Whorley, 55, is serving his sentence at the Gilmer Federal Correction Institution in Glenville, W.Va.

He previously was sentenced to 46 months in prison for a 1999 child pornography conviction.

Splash Page » Neil Gaiman On The ‘Obscenity’ Of Manga Collector Christopher Handley’s Trial: “Neil Gaiman On The ‘Obscenity’ Of Manga Collector Christopher Handley’s Trial
Published by Jennifer Vineyard on Monday, November 24, 2008 at 2:09 pm.

Neil GaimanLook through your comic book collection. Do you have Alan Moore’s ‘Lost Girls’? Any of S. Clay Wilson’s Underground Comix? Even Neil Gaiman’s ‘Sandman’ series? If the prosecution of manga collector Christopher Handley sticks, all of that and more could be considered obscene, Gaiman told MTV.

‘I wrote a story about a serial killer who kidnaps and rapes children, and then murders them,’ Gaiman said, referring to a storyline in ‘The Doll’s House.’ ‘We did that as a comic, not for the purposes of titillation or anything like that, but if you bought that comic, you could be arrested for it? That’s just deeply wrong. Nobody was hurt. The only thing that was hurt were ideas.’

Gaiman’s currently supporting the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund’s fight to defend Handley, who was arrested in Iowa for possession of obscene material based on his private collection, which included lolicon and yaoi manga. Lolicon focuses on the Lolita complex, where yaoi features male homosexual romance for a primarily female audience.

‘They found his manga, and found some objectionable panels,’ Gaiman said. ‘He’s been arrested for having some drawings of rude things in manga. I’m sorry, but if you went through my comic collection, you could arrest me if you’re going to start doing that. It’s just wrong.’

‘There is explicit sex in yaoi comics,’ Handley’s lawyer Eric Chase told MTV. ‘And the men are drawn in a very androgynous style, which has the effect of making them look really young. There’s a real taboo in Japan about showing pubic hair, so they’re all drawn without it, which also makes them look young. So what concerned the authorities were the depictions of children in explicit sexual situations that they believed to be obscene. But there are no actual children. It was all very crude images from a comic book.’

‘Do you remember there was a law passed prohibiting making things that simulated child pornography, even if the things actually weren’t?’ Gaiman asked, referring to part of the PROTECT Act (18 U.S.C. Section 1466A). (As in situations where an of-age female is in a pornographic situation, but ‘where she’s being presented as if she were 13.’) ‘They said, ‘For heaven’s sake, we’re not talking about art. We’re only talking about stuff where you’re leading people to believe they’re looking at real child porn,’’ said Gaiman.

Still, despite the argument that there was no actual children portrayed in the manga, Handley faces felony obsenity charges, including the receipt and possession of obscene visual representations of the sexual abuse of children. The case is going to trial on December 2. The jury will determine whether the manga is obscene or if it has artistic value. If found guilty of the charges against him, Handley faces a five-year mandatory minimum sentence.

‘He’d be punished as if it were actual child porn,’ his lawyer said. ‘And he did not look at child pornography.’

Gaiman’s been making appearances and giving the OK to Black Phoenix Alchemy Lab to make perfumes of his books to benefit the CBLDF to help them raise funds for Handley’s defense, as they did for comic book store owner Gordon Lee.

‘They’ve made in excess of $38,000 for the fund, which is pretty wonderful,’ Gaiman said, ‘and it’s real money that gets used for legal cases.’

Interesting case developing in the USA, and the prosecution involves child pornography in Manga format.

CBLDF – Press Releases: CBLDF To Serve As Special Consultant In PROTECT Act Manga Case

The Comic Book Legal Defense Fund has signed on as a special consultant to the defense of Chistopher Handley, an Iowa collector who faces up to 20 years in prison for possession of manga. The Fund adds its First Amendment expertise to the case, managed by United Defense Group’s Eric Chase, and will also be providing monetary support towards obtaining expert witnesses.

Handley, 38, faces penalties under the PROTECT Act (18 U.S.C. Section 1466A) for allegedly possessing manga that the government claims to be obscene. The government alleges that the material includes drawings that they claim appear to be depictions of minors engaging in sexual conduct. No photographic content is at issue in Handley’s case.

‘Handley’s case is deeply troubling, because the government is prosecuting a private collector for possession of art,’ says CBLDF Executive Director Charles Brownstein. ‘In the past, CBLDF has had to defend the First Amendment rights of retailers and artists, but never before have we experienced the Federal Government attempting to strip a citizen of his freedom because he owned comic books. We will bring our best resources to bear in aiding Mr. Handley’s counsel as they defend his freedom and the First Amendment rights of every art-loving citizen in this country.’

Mr. Handley’s case began in May 2006 when he received an express mail package from Japan that contained seven Japanese comic books. That package was intercepted by the Postal Inspector, who applied for a search warrant after determining that the package contained cartoon images of objectionable content. Unaware that his materials were searched, Handley drove away from the post office and was followed by various law enforcement officers, who pulled him over and followed him to his home. Once there, agents from the Postal Inspector’s office, Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency, Special Agents from the Iowa Division of Criminal Investigation, and officers from the Glenwood Police Department seized Handley’s collection of over 1,200 manga books or publications; and hundreds of DVDs, VHS tapes, laser disks; seven computers, and other documents. Though Handley’s collection was comprised of hundreds of comics covering a wide spectrum of manga, the government is prosecuting images appearing in a small handful.

Putting the case into context, Burton Joseph, CBLDF’s Legal Counsel says, ‘In the lengthy time in which I have represented CBLDF and its clients, I have never encountered a situation where criminal prosecution was brought against a private consumer for possession of material for personal use in his own home. This prosecution has profound implications in limiting the First Amendment for art and artists, and comics in particular, that are on the cutting edge of creativity. It misunderstands the nature of avant-garde art in its historical perspective and is a perversion of anti-obscenity laws.’

Eric Chase and his team at the United Defense Group have been vigorously defending Handley, and scored a major First Amendment victory earlier this year when the judge found portions of the PROTECT Act unconstitutional in his ruling on a motion to dismiss. District Judge Gritzner of the Southern District of Iowa found that subsections 1466(a)(2) and (b)(2) of 18 U.S.C. 1466A unconstitutional. Those sections make it a crime to knowingly produce, distribute, receive, or possess with intent to distribute, ‘a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting,’ that ‘is, or appears to be’ a minor engaged in sexual conduct. Judge Gritzner found that those sections restrict protected speech and are constitutionally infirm.

Handley now faces charges under the surviving sections of 1466A, which will require a jury to determine whether the drawings at issue are legally obscene. The material cannot be deemed obscene unless it meets all three of the criteria of the Miller test for obscenity: ‘(a) whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest; (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.’ The jury must answer all three questions in the affirmative in order to convict.

Eric Chase recognized the importance of the case, and of the CBLDF’s contribution to it, in a statement to the CBLDF: ‘This case represents the latest in a string of efforts by the Department of Justice to encroach on free speech. The United Defense Group is committed to fighting to maintain the protections guaranteed in the Constitution, and we appreciate the CBLDF’s support in this fight.’

About the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund

The Comic Book Legal Defense Fund was founded in 1986 as a 501 (c) 3 non-profit organization dedicated to the preservation of First Amendment rights for members of the comics community. They have defended dozens of Free Expression cases in courts across the United States, and led important education initiatives promoting comics literacy and free expression. For additional information, donations, and other inquiries call 800-99-CBLDF or visit http://www.cbldf.org or http://www.myspace.com/cbldf.