The FSC just sent out an email regarding this issue. They asked Reed Lee to provide an interpretation of what the Supreme Court said...like that's easy to do, but here is a portion of his comments:

"Thus, those who do not deal in actual child pornography and do not say that they do, have little to fear from yesterday's decision. Those who hope to make a sale of adult pornography by convincing a buyer that it might be illegal child pornography should have stopped doing that decades ago. They can now expect to go to jail if they continue".

As I read the decision and opinions I was a bit worried that if we used "boy" or "teen" in a title, we could have some problems. But after talking with an attorney friend of mine he pointed out, as Chad said, all of our box covers, films and disk printing contain the 2257 info which includes a statement to the fact that all persons participating in the film were over the age of 18 at the time, so we should have nothing to worry about.

Appears that as of yet, the sky is not falling!

Bill