[sickoflibs]

RE :””Rather, some affirmative act is required (printing, saving, downloading, etc.) to show that defendant in fact exercised dominion and control over the images that were on his screen,” Ciparick wrote. “To hold otherwise, would extend the reach of (state law) to conduct — viewing — that our Legislature has not deemed criminal.”

That seems perfectly reasonable. If nothing else it forces the state to have solid evidence that someone did something wrong.

If it was never downloaded or distributed it then how do they prove someone viewed it? Install spyware on our computers that cam-cords users?

Anyone using the internet is aware of redirect links that take the computer to unintended sites.

[sickoflibs]

Another popular way to prove someone possessed child porn is when he uses his credit card to buy it, and that focuses on a product made by for-profit pornographers, pretty good evidence.