A friend of mine used to work at a museum helping to archive and preserve photographs, mainly from the late Victorian/early Edwardian period. There was a controversy there (internally only) because some of the photos were of semi naked children. These photos were just ordinary family photographs from a variety of sources and the 'children' involved were, by the time these photos were being made ready for exhibition, all either dead or in their late 80's - 90's and yet it was still considered 'paedophilliac' to show them.

Its a tricky issue because it is all about perception. Yes, overtly pornographic photos of children are bad and should be heavily regulated. However, there has to be a limit. Could a father taking photos of his daughter on holiday and posting those photos in facebook or flickr be accused of child pornography? There has been a recent trend for media inspired frenzy bordering on mob mentality on issues such as paedophilia and these responses are rarely rational or sensible - inspired by the correct motives and ideals but powered by a darker aspect of humanity.

In the case presented, I would say it was not pornography so much as exploitation... there is a difference..