Resumen
The article discusses whether digital images, even those that are considered to be pornographic, enjoy same constitutional protection as any other form of expression. The U.S. Supreme Court case, known as Ashcrofi v. Free Speech Coalition, may seem a minor skirmish involving issues at the fringes of the First Amendment's guarantee of free expression in the U.S. According to legislative findings leading off the Child Pornography Prevention Act in the nation, viewing forbidden pictures can desensitize the viewer to the pathology of sexual abuse and the exploitation of children. In 1986, the Court summarily struck down an Indianapolis ordinance criminalizing sexually theme works that had the effect of subordinating women. The 1996 Child Pornography Prevention Act rests on premises and language of stunning vagueness that together could lead to consequences that might ultimately eviscerate the First Amendment as a protector of unpopular speech. The common pattern of legal response to new communication technologies reflects the reality that new media achieve more effective form of communication than their existing counterparts.