Is possession of CP legal in Japan?

[jaystak]

Is it legal to have CP on your computer in Japan? Is it legal to download CP through peer-to-peer networks while living in Japan?

 

[harlock3333]

no

 

[jaystak]

no

Are you sure? I read that any production or distribution of CP is illegal, but that mere possession is not illegal. Here is a recent article about it:

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20090331i1.html

"What about the simple possession of child pornography, say, downloaded from the Internet?

International and Japanese human rights activists, as well as the United Nations and the United States, have repeatedly said this loophole remains the fundamental flaw in Japan's efforts to go after child pornographers.

Production and distribution of child pornography is illegal, but simple possession is not (and that term can be very difficult to define, legally). A U.S. State Department human rights report released in February notes that the absence of a statutory basis makes it difficult for police to obtain search warrants. "

 

[guy]

Yes it's illegal. The problem is what exactly is considered "CP". Since Japan has some exceptions for content like pre-1999 JI material (which the UN conveniently lumps together with child abuse CP), articles like this pop up all the time, as if Japan is a safe-haven for child molesters and the like.

Actual CP depicting the abuse of children is indeed illegal, just as it should be.

 

[jaystak]

Then why does the Japan Times say that simple possession is not illegal? This article was published in March of this year.

 

[guy]

Because the newspapers, especially the english translations, always make grand sweeping statements, and in particular statements which bait people into buying the papers. The same happens with sensationalist reports about the JI industry, as they always focus on a couple most revealing models/dvds and blatantly ignore the rest, misrepresenting the JI scene and making it look like a bunch of guys peddling junior smut.

A better source is legal documents, namely the laws themselves and a series of case documents showing how prosecutors and judges have interpreted those laws.

 

[buttobi]

uzzled:
The crude fact is possession of even the hardest CP is not prohibited by the laws of Japan. But any kind of distribution including its public display and person to person excange is illegal. I remember a case in which after someone was prosecuted for posting CP pics on an imageboard, another guy that he got them from by email was also arrested.

 

[bologna]

Just so you're not confused (one yes and one no) here's another no.

No.

 

[jaystak]

From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_pornography#Japan)
"Current Japanese law permits people to possess child porn images if they have no intention to sell or pass them on to others."

 

[aikia101]

What matters in effect is how the laws in Japan (or anywhere) on the books are construed by the books. This is the case for all law really, because rarely ever are laws removed from the books, rather a presence or lack of enforcement exists.

 

[Trollbeater]

Possession of child pornography is not illegal in Japan.

Source: h**p://www.interpol.int/Public/Children/SexualAbuse/NationalLaws/csaJapan.asp

Using P2P to access child pornography is illegal since it would be distribution.

P.S.
Rather than talking out of your *ss just Google it people!! Sorry but it just had to be said.

 

[jaystak]

Possession of child pornography is not illegal in Japan.

Source: h**p://www.interpol.int/Public/Children/SexualAbuse/NationalLaws/csaJapan.asp

Using P2P to access child pornography is illegal since it would be distribution.

P.S.
Rather than talking out of your *ss just Google it people!! Sorry but it just had to be said.

I would add that possession is not illegal only if there is no intent to distribute it. There was a case in which 2 Japanese men were convicted recently. They had deliberately placed the files in the Shared folder of their p2p client knowing it would be distributed. It was this that provided grounds for their conviction, not the possession of it. And not, seemingly, the downloading of it.

 

[buttobi]

I would add that possession is not illegal only if there is no intent to distribute it.

And because the intent can be verified only by the act of distribution, mere possession is not illegal.

Though there is only one prefecture out of 47 in total, Nara, that prohibits mere possession by its regional ordinances.

 

[daredemonai]

Thanks for the link, Trollbeater.

Here's the latest news along with my translation.

児童ポルノ法改正は困難 与野党に溝、協議進まず

　児童ポルノの拡散防止を強化する児童買春・ポルノ禁止法改正の今国会での実現が困難な情勢となっている。与野党双方の改正案は国会に出そろったが、互いの案を激しく批判し合って歩み寄る気配がみられず、協議は全く進んでいない。

　個人が趣味で持つ「単純所持」を禁止しないのは、主要８カ国（Ｇ８）で日本とロシアだけ。このため与党は昨年６月、単純所持を一律に禁止した上で、性的好奇心を満たす目的の所持には罰則を科す改正案を衆院に提出した。一方、民主党は単純所持の一律禁止は「恣意（しい）的な捜査につながりかねない」と批判。児童ポルノを買うか、何度も繰り返し取得した場合に適用する「取得罪」創設を柱とする改正案を今年３月に衆院に提出した。

　民主党案に対し、与党内からは「法改正の出発点はあくまで単純所持の禁止。民主党案では改正の意味がない」（自民党ベテラン）との批判が続出し、接点を見いだすのは難しいとの意見が大勢を占めた。

　与党は民主党に参考人聴取を打診したが、民主党は拒否して修正協議を逆提案するなど強硬姿勢を崩していない。
2009/05/09 16:36 【共同通信】

Child Pornography Law Revision in Trouble: Gulf Between Ruling and Opposition Parties, Deliberations Stalled

Prospects for a revision of the Child Prostitution and Child Pornography Law to further prevent the spread of child pornography are shaky. Both the ruling coalition and opposition parties have set forth their respective proposals, but each side strongly criticizes the other's proposal, there is no sign that they are nearing compromise, and deliberations have come to a complete stop.

Of the G8 nations, only Japan and Russia do not forbid individuals from simply possessing child pornography for their own interest. For this reason, in June of last year, the ruling coalition introduced a proposal to the Lower House of the Diet that would revise the law to include an across-the-board ban on simple possession and create criminal penalties for those who possess [child pornography] for the purpose of sexual curiosity. On the other side, the Democratic Party has criticized an across-the-board ban, saying "It could lead to arbitrary investigations." In March of this year, they proposed a revision in the Lower House whose centerpiece is the definition of a "crime of acquisition," which would be the purchasing or repeated acquisition [of child pornography].

One Liberal Democratic Party veteran said of the Democratic Party's proposal, "The banning of simple possession is the starting point of any revision. The Democratic Party's proposal is meaningless." Others expressed similar opinions, and most said that it would be hard to find common ground.

The ruling coalition proposed hearings on the subject to the Democratic Party, but the Democrat Party rejected the proposal, making a counter-proposal to hold deliberations on amendment, and showing no sign of relaxing their stance.

2009/05/09 16:36 Kyodo Tsushin News Service

 

[jaystak]

What's not clear is the punishment for acquiring CP. It may be legal to possess it, but obviously to possess it there must have been an act of acquisition, probably downloading it from the internet. If it was acquired through p2p networks, the file may have been partially uploaded during its download time (distribution). If it was downloaded from a pay-site, this is illegal (purchase). So I assume that the law allows for the download of images from free sites where the possibility of simultaneous upload did not exist.

 

[buttobi]

Purchase and simple downloading are not illegal. Using p2p is illegal for the reason you mentioned.

 

[daredemonai]

What's not clear is the punishment for acquiring CP. It may be legal to possess it, but obviously to possess it there must have been an act of acquisition, probably downloading it from the internet. If it was acquired through p2p networks, the file may have been partially uploaded during its download time (distribution). If it was downloaded from a pay-site, this is illegal (purchase). So I assume that the law allows for the download of images from free sites where the possibility of simultaneous upload did not exist.

The law is pretty clear, actually. Direct download=OK; p2p/torrent=not OK. The irony is that part of the concept behind p2p/torrenting is to get around copyright laws by dispersing responsibility. But under Japanese law, if you transmit CP at all, they can nail you. Arguing that you only transmitted this or that fragment to this or that peer won't get you very far in court.

It will be interesting to see how the Japanese justice system changes when the jury system is introduced next year.

 

[jaystak]

The law is pretty clear, actually. Direct download=OK; p2p/torrent=not OK. The irony is that part of the concept behind p2p/torrenting is to get around copyright laws by dispersing responsibility. But under Japanese law, if you transmit CP at all, they can nail you. Arguing that you only transmitted this or that fragment to this or that peer won't get you very far in court.

It will be interesting to see how the Japanese justice system changes when the jury system is introduced next year.

Nonetheless, turning off all upload options on a p2p client would theoretically be the same as a simple one way download from a site.

 

[daredemonai]

Nonetheless, turning off all upload options on a p2p client would theoretically be the same as a simple one way download from a site.

Indeed. But I wouldn't want to find myself sitting in court and trying to argue that point to a judge and jury. :attention:

 

[japonaliya]

The legal stance that the US and other Western nations use as their criteria for making child porn illegal (and in most countries, that would be a minor under 18 engaging in sexual acts, or provocative, un natural poses) is that since to produce the cp is an illegal act unto itself, and the cp is a record of child abuse (sic) propagating and causing a demand for such material furthers the motivation to produce and disseminate more of the same...

Now, I have no issue with that, provided that the cp was produced in a time and place where such sexual activities of minors was illegal when and where it was made!

BUT....here is a hypothetical....

In Russia and up to recently in Japan, cp, at least soft core (nudity, and provocative poses) is/was legal.
Also, the AOC may differ, so that a 14-15 year old can concent to nude poses and at least simulated sex acts.
Again..what about the material produced in the Scandinavian countries in the late 60's or early 70's?
All the Lolita mags were legal for a time, or at least, the US had no laws prohibiting them. (I think it was the 1st Meese Commission in the early 80's that introduced legislation banning all sexual acts inc. posing of minors)

So...my question is....if the material can ber proven to be legally made when it was produced...how can another country call it illegal cp..WHEN NO CRIME WAS COMMITTED IN ORDER TO PRODUCE IT AT THE TIME????

I sort of already know the answer, but other thoughts would be interesting...