Like the article said, one of the major opponents of it was sex health site. Minors tend to have more embarrassing concerns related to sexuality than adults, and to maturely get answers you're going to see and hear sexual but tasteful material.

Asking for credit card numbers before entering a porn site at all is fairly worrying anyway. I hate giving out my card number unless it's a major, recognized company.

Besides, I didn't even know this was a law we had at one point. As a minor for a fair amount of years after the law was enacted, I never had a problem finding porn on the net. Usually there was, and still is, a "proof of age" part before you enter the main page: 2 links, one that says you ARE 18 or older (21 in some states--it actually says that), and one that says you aren't (which would lead you to some harmless, generic site). The penalty fell upon the viewer for lying about their age.

For a while, out of some fear I'd be found out, I'd do some elaborately high tech action in order to get into the site without viewing the disclaimer--look for another link. Eventually I decided to be ultra daring and lie about my age.

If for some reason you find it highly harmful that a minor that is seeking out naked pictures to self-stimulate themselves to, I guess you can push for much higher security on all porn sites. If so, the minors--like I at the time--would disappointingly go back to general cleavage, nudity in movies, and general imagination (still one of my favorites).

Regardless, sites like Salon.com have a point. They are not intending to be pornographic. The vagueness of the anti-porn law would get educational and artistic sites in trouble, because the "community" decided that it could be used for masturbation.

This news just broke in. Check it out here
http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/the_web/article1554275.ece

A 1998 law has been struck down by a senior disrict judge. Is the American spirit of freedom going over board.