The court found sufficient evidence of duress to support convictions for aggravated sexual assault of a child (Pen. Code § 269) and forcible lewd acts on a child (Pen. Code, § 288, subd.(b)). A review of the record and the videotape of the molestations indicated that the victim was nine years old, the perpetrator was her father, and she engaged in the conduct only because directed to do so by her father. The court found the record showed a small, vulnerable and isolated child who engaged in sex acts only in response to her father’s parental and physical authority. The defendant posted still photographs, taken from a videotape he made of him sexually molesting his daughter, on the Internet. The court agreed that there was insufficient evidence of “commercial purposes” to support a conviction for employment of a minor to produce pornography for commercial purposes (Pen. Code, § 311.4, sub.(b)). Defendant posted the photographs only once and there was no evidence he sought to make any money from them. [2-1 decision on this point].