Extreme Tony The Tiger Porn
First extreme porn court case dropped - for what turns out to be a joke clip involving an animated "tiger".

Which I am glad about of course, but it only took a few months after the commencement of the law for the police to use it in a case that was not only clearly non-abusive, but ignored the law's requirements that the image be "pornographic" and "realistic" (and that a reasonable person would think that any such person or animal was real).

The same man is also charged for a separate video, which will be the first test of an image which portrays
"an act which results, or is likely to result, in serious injury to a person’s anus, breasts or genitals". What could that be?
More analysis and information at
Heresy Corner.
(This is far from the first prosecution, but previous cases AFAICT have so far involved people pleading guilty, and little is known about the nature of the images.)
ETA - Hmm, this isn't the first time I've posted about the possible legal and pornographic ramifications of images involving
Kellog's Intellectual Property.
[Tiger image by B_cool from http://flickr.com/photos/34323424@N00/864254125]