In 2013, the Supreme Court of the Netherlands rules that "a realistic depiction of a non-existent child in the sense that the depiction is indistinguishable from real" is illegal, but that when "the persons depicted are 'not real children' and that for 'the average viewer (and also children) (...) it soon becomes apparent that these are manipulated images'," such depictions are not illegal. [91] Andrew R. Leslie, of Middleburg, Florida, was sentenced to 30 years in prison for engaging in a child exploitation enterprise, [8] where he was a VIP member of The Giftbox Exchange. Leslie also operated another darknet child exploitation network that featured videos of severe violent sexual abuse of children, and in March 2018 was sentenced to an additional 60 years in prison for sexual abuse and production of child sexual abuse of infants and toddlers. The government claimed that publication or supply of such material could be illegal under the Obscene Publications Act, if a jury would consider it to have a tendency to "deprave and corrupt". [53] However, the published bill made no reference to the "deprave and corrupt" test.

Text als Kinderpornographie? | Strafverteidiger Hamburg // Rechtsanwalt". Strafverteidiger Hamburg - Rechtsanwalt Strafrecht (in German). 2013-07-16. Archived from the original on 2013-12-25 . Retrieved 2020-12-11. In the same year, in an interview with Life, Nabokov was asked which of his writings had most pleased him. He answered: JDP formally opposes the 2013 child pornography law" (PDF). taruiyoshikazu.com (in Japanese). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-07-03 . Retrieved 2013-06-17. In October 2014, Robul Hoque was convicted of possessing up to 400 explicit manga images involving fictional children, in the UK's first prosecution of its kind. He received a 9-month suspended sentence. He was also warned in court that had he been in possession of actual child pornography, he would have been sentenced to jail for a longer term in years. [60] Fictional child pornography legal [ edit ] Brazil [ edit ] Gordon, Tony (13 July 2002). "Virtual pornography case tossed out again by judge: Constitutionality of state law results in dismissal of charges". Chicago Daily Herald.Humbert Humbert's double name recalls Poe's " William Wilson", a tale in which the main character is haunted by his doppelgänger, paralleling to the presence of Humbert's own doppelgänger, Clare Quilty. Humbert is not, however, his real name, but a chosen pseudonym. The theme of the doppelgänger also occurs in Nabokov's earlier novel, Despair. This law faced criticism from legal experts. Maciej Wrześniewski questioned the legitimacy of this article, arguing that "it is not possible to unquestionably confirm the age of a depicted person—since such a person does not in fact exist". [36] This opinion was shared by Maciej Szmit, who called the whole article "unfortunately worded". [37] According to the Polish prosecution authorities, if the age of a depicted person is in question, a court may appoint anthropological experts to determine it. [38] If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.

Besitz, Erwerb und Verbreiten von Jugendpornographie - was tun bei Vorladung, Anzeige oder Durchsuchung?". ANWALT (in German). 14 November 2013. Archived from the original on 19 August 2014 . Retrieved 9 December 2020. Thus, virtual and drawn pornographic depictions of minors may still be found illegal under U.S. federal obscenity law. The obscenity law further states in section C "It is not a required element of any offense under this section that the minor depicted actually exist." Restrictions Lifted on Maine Man Arrested for Explicit 'Anime' ". Anime News Network. Archived from the original on 2019-12-09 . Retrieved 2019-11-25.

Dustin Godfrey and Kristi Patton (2018-01-09). "Child exploitation forum moderator in Penticton sentenced to five years - Kelowna Capital News". Kelowna Capital News . Retrieved 2018-01-23. Nabokov described Humbert as "a vain and cruel wretch who manages to appear 'touching'" later in the same interview. [13] [14] When asked about coming up with Humbert's doubled name, he described it as "[...] a hateful name for a hateful person. It is also a kingly name, and I did need a royal vibration for Humbert the Fierce and Humbert the Humble." [15] Despite initial trepidation, there was no official response in the U.S., and the first American edition was issued by G. P. Putnam's Sons in August 1958. The book was into a third printing within days and became the first since Gone with the Wind to sell 100,000 copies in its first three weeks. [44] Orville Prescott, the influential book reviewer of the New York Times, greatly disliked the book, describing it as "dull, dull, dull in a pretentious, florid and archly fatuous fashion." [45] This review failed to influence the book's sales. [ citation needed] Legal in the US, watching "pixie sex" lands New Zealand man in jail". Ars Technica. 23 April 2013. Archived from the original on 2013-04-24 . Retrieved 2013-04-23. Citizen's Guide To U.S. Federal Law On Obscenity". United States Department of Justice. 26 May 2015. Archived from the original on 7 September 2019 . Retrieved September 17, 2019.

Adamski, Andrzej (2015). Cybercrime Legislation in Poland (Report). pp.21–22. doi: 10.13140/RG.2.1.1946.2249. Since the end of 2008 the so-called pseudo and virtual child pornography has been forbidden in Poland. Critics have further noted that, since the novel is a first person narrative by Humbert, the novel gives very little information about what Lolita is like as a person, that in effect she has been silenced by not being the book's narrator. Nomi Tamir-Ghez writes: "Not only is Lolita's voice silenced, her point of view, the way she sees the situation and feels about it, is rarely mentioned and can be only surmised by the reader... since it is Humbert who tells the story... throughout most of the novel, the reader is absorbed in Humbert's feelings." [16] Similarly Mica Howe and Sarah Appleton Aguiar write that the novel silences and objectifies Lolita. [17] Christine Clegg notes that this is a recurring theme in criticism of the novel in the 1990s. [18] Actor Brian Cox, who played Humbert in a 2009 one-man stage monologue based on the novel, stated that the novel is "not about Lolita as a flesh and blood entity. It's Lolita as a memory." He concluded that a stage monologue would be truer to the book than any film could possibly be. [19] Elizabeth Janeway, writing in The New York Times Book Review, holds: "Humbert is every man who is driven by desire, wanting his Lolita so badly that it never occurs to him to consider her as a human being, or as anything but a dream-figment made flesh." [20] New proposals will make all obscene images of children illegal - Ministry of Justice". Justice.gov.uk. 28 May 2008. Archived from the original on 21 November 2008 . Retrieved 2008-10-27. Newport News Man Convicted of Searching for Obscene Images Online While on Federal Supervision". U.S. Attorney's Office Eastern District of Virginia. May 18, 2018. Archived from the original on October 28, 2020 . Retrieved October 25, 2020.The children's charity NCH stated that "this is a welcome announcement which makes a clear statement that drawings or computer-generated images of child abuse are as unacceptable as a photograph". Others stated that the intended law would limit artistic expression, patrol peoples' imaginations, and that it is safer for pedophiles' fantasies "to be enacted in their computers or imaginations [rather] than in reality". [54] As of 2004, the Norwegian penal act criminalizes any depictions that "sexualize" children, even if it does not actually show sexual acts with children. [30] This could include any artificially produced material, including written text, drawn images, animation, manipulated images, an adult model with childish clothes, toys, or surroundings. [31] In December 2004, the Office of Film and Literature Classification determined that Puni Puni Poemy—which depicts nude children in sexual situations, though not usually thought of as pornographic by fans—was objectionable under the Act and therefore illegal to publish in New Zealand. A subsequent appeal failed, [26] and the series remained banned until 2021, when it was passed uncut with an R16 rating. [27] Clegg sees the novel's non-disclosure of Lolita's feelings as directly linked to the fact that her real name is Dolores and only Humbert refers to her as Lolita. [21] Humbert also states he has effectively " solipsized" Lolita early in the novel. [22] Eric Lemay writes: