I've noticed a few, I think I know the ones you're talking about. I saw a few in the MarketPlace that made me do a double take. The legalities are that even virtual images can be considered actionable if they portray or appear to portray minors in sexual situations or lewdly displaying their genitals. I have seen some of what I would consider close to erotic images featuring mature-but-petite bodied figures with patently underage-looking faces. (and the hits go pouring in to the MarketPlace) I haven't seen anything I personally find objectionable but I agree the limit is being nudged. But I'm against censorship in all forms and that most certainly includes fictional images that never involved real people. As the old saying goes: I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend your right to say it. Title 18 of the United States Code governs child pornography. See Chapter 110, Sexual Exploitation and Other Abuse of Children. 18 U.S.C. 2256 defines "Child pornography" as: "any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct, where - (A) the production of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; (B) such visual depiction is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; (C) such visual depiction has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or (D) such visual depiction is advertised, promoted, presented, described, or distributed in such a manner that conveys the impression that the material is or contains a visual depiction of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct . . ."