[jacquesm]

Slippery slopes notwithstanding you could easily make a case that anything lower than the lowest age-of-consent is at least clearly child porn.

After that you're in a gray area, but below that you definitely should get into a lot of trouble.

[grecy]

So does that include a photo of my 1 year old girl wearing only a diaper? What about my boy? What about when they're 3? or 7? or...

And what about teenagers wearing tiny bikinis?

The slope is more than slippery, it's vertical.

[adrianN]

It is not well defined what "porn" is. In my country it is, as far as I know, perfectly legal to distribute photos of nude children, as long as they are not engaged in a "sexual act". cf. the art of David Hamilton.