The Supreme Court of India is hearing arguments from child protection organizations after the Madras High Court ruled that downloading and watching child pornography is not a criminal offense. In January, the High Court dismissed charges against 28-year-old S. Harish, who was caught in possession of two pieces of child sexual abuse material on his
like i said it’s all semantic. In this case, download is almost certainly being used to describe a scenario where the original image was sent in whatsapp, and then downloaded to the phone locally, and found on the phones filesystem. Otherwise we would not be using the term download here. That could be a language barrier thing i suppose. But in the contexts of what it’s implying, i doubt it.
likewise, i could just as easily argue that everything you “post” on the internet is actually an upload, and as a result, you upload every interaction you have on the internet, however it’s only contextually used to describe something like “uploading a youtube video” where there a very clear contextual meaning presented. Same thing with download, people download games, but listen to the music or “stream” it from spotify, it’s technically downloading, but it’s actually not.
Going by the contextual, and colloquially referred to definition of “download” (hell the article linked literally says “he watched it for two years” so try to semantic that one out) download in isolation, is the flow of traffic to you, from somewhere else, downloading, downloaded, or a download, that verb usage of it, as opposed to an adjective usage of it, is completely different. The article does not say “download” it says “downloaded, downloading” and any potentially related forms of that word refer to the act of download, of which is being locally and explicitly stored on your device. The only instance where this wouldn’t apply is if he didn’t download it (notice the verb form usage) and it was actually cached by whatsapp, and that somehow lead to him being arrested.
Which is a possibility, but is also a completely different scenario.
Yes. Again, that’s literally what is actually happening.
You keep throwing out these statements like “Oh, well if that’s true then we might as well also say this is true” and then “this” turns out to be just the most banal shit.
I genuinely don’t think you even know what it is you’re trying to argue here. You’re either so down in the weeds of some bizarre semantic sophistry that you’ve lost track of daylight, or you’re arguing points that no one else was disagreeing on while acting like you’ve just dropped the Pentagon Papers.
Either way, I really can’t be bothered anymore. I’ve tried my best, but it’s like trying to teach a pigeon to read.
i literally started this entire thread off based on semantic technicalities, why are we acting like this ISN’T what im talking about? Nobody should be shocked by this. I didn’t come to argue the legality of holding CP because if i did, it would be very short, it’s illegal, plain and simple, that’s how the law in the US works.