For the record: the U.S. statute attempting to ban CGI child porn was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. They found the statute overly vague (the language of it, if you've ever read the thing, contains a lot of "mights" and "coulds" and "appears to bes"), and they found, too, that it created a new class of victimless crime that was escentially a "thought crime"; unprecedented in U.S. criminal justice history. The Justice Department was unable to show that CGI child porn had ever hurt anyone, or that it was a pervasive problem. The community standards issue still aplies, but not to CGI images which are non-pornographic; i.e., those not placing images of children in a sexual context. CGI child porn is no longer a special class of porn, in other words--it's to be treated under the law like all other pornography. Despite its right-wing history, the Supreme Court acted wisely here, ruling that the potential harm which might be done to society by CGI child-porn was less significant than the potential damage to 1st amendment rights caused by the statute. It will be difficult for congress to pass a new law that bears much resemblence to the one that was overturned; the ruling was a pretty resounding rejection of Ashcroft and his allies. And there's not likely to be a more conservative court anytime soon. I hope.