|
Did you read the whole opinion (34 pages) written by the judge?
The basics are this - that having images in your web browser cache doesn't prove that you viewed them intentionally or that you possessed them intentionally, unless there is another factor involved.
What this ruling does is protect YOU if you happen to be in New York and happen to be on the internet and unintentionally hit a CP page, CP pop-up or CP redirect that you didn't mean to hit. You didn't do it intentionally looking for CP and thus even if you "viewed" the images for a half second and they ended up in your browser cache you wouldn't be tossed in jail.
On the other hand - if they found in your search records and history that you visited a CP site and clicked around it and had searched for it and had a browser history of viewing such sites, then (and only then) they would assume that fact - combined with having images in your cache - WAS intentional and that you should be in jail.
Its the right ruling. If it wasn't that way all of us could be in jail because some far away CP guy managed to get a pop-up in front of us.
The headline, and even much of the story, is written to get traffic and attention, but reading the actual court ruling as written by the judge it makes perfect sense.
|