The Internet Kiddie Porn Excuse?

We all know that copyright owners, people who care about their privacy, anyone who believes in the law...is being SCREWED by the Internet.

Why? Because GOOGLE is bigger than most governments. GOOGLE and AMAZON and EBAY and a few others are making so much money they can buy politicians (as well as hookers).

They've rigged it so that if there's a common sense law on the books...it can be negated with double-talk.

Take KIDDIE PORN. Yes, you CAN. Or so it seems.

While reputable pornographers (there is such a thing) do their photo shoots and make their movies and keep accurate records (by law) of which teen-looking stars are actually of legal age...INTERNET SITES DON'T.

In the United States, "18 USC §2257" helps to ensure that producers will not exploit minors, either through carelessness, recklessness, or deliberate indifference. The FBI will make sure of it. Or so it seems. Here's the FBI view:

But what about all the porn sites that steal photos from everybody, and all the bloggers who grab any picture they want or even offer entire movies (for which they get money from whatever Oron-type file service they use)?

Since the INTERNET rules, and GOOGLE makes sure their search engine can take you anywhere you want to go, there's some kind of sleazy "exemption" caveat that these cruds use.

Amazing. The nerve. The idiocy.

Somebody ups pictures of a teenager with no pubic hair, playing with a "Games of Thrones" action figure that was manufactured in 2014, and these assholes can pretend it was "created prior to July 3, 1995?"

These assholes can claim their photos "do not portray conduct" that involves under-age people because THEY say so?

That shit is going to hold up in a court of law??

What a grand excuse! Let's use that in the "real world" shall we? "Officer, this is not cocaine, I claim it's chalk manufactured before 1995. You therefore can't confiscate it and do a lab test, you can't arrest me, and you must leave me alone!"

Over on YouTUBE the big caveat is, "Not in violation of copyright; this is fair use. Material is being used for review. Copyright remains with the original owner even though I'm making use of it without permission..."

Sure, sure, go right ahead!

Want to try THAT in the real world? Shoplift an Apple laptop computer out of the store and tell the security guard: "You can't detain me, this is FAIR USE. I'm REVIEWING this item. I don't claim ownership of trademark or copyright...Apple controls the manufacture of the laptops. It's just that THIS one is mine to do as I please, because it's, uh, uh, protected by "creatve commons" law, and because not only should information be free...so should machines that help me access information. So go away..."

Legalese. Jibber jabber. Con artist crapola. Call it what you will...it's being used all the time on the Internet. It seems to take a very angry copyright owner, or someone with very strong connections to the FBI, to do anything about it. Especially when the bigger shrug is "Oh, it's whack-a-mole, if we take down their website, if we remove their EBAY account, they'll just get another. Let's not bother...have a donut?"