Comment on 25 arrested in global hit against AI-generated child sexual abuse material
BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 1 month ago
On one hand I don’t think this kind of thing can be consequence free (from a practical standpoint). On the other hand… how old were the subjects? You can’t look at a person to determine their age and someone that looks like a child but is actually adult wouldn’t be charged as a child pornographer. The whole reason age limits are set is to give reasonable assurance the subject is not being exploited or otherwise harmed by the act.
This is a massive grey area and I just hope sentences are proportional to the crime. I could live with this kind of thing being classified as a misdemeanor provided the creator didn’t use underage subjects to train or influence the output.
I could live with this kind of thing being classified as a misdemeanor provided the creator didn’t use underage subjects to train or influence the output.
So could I, but that doesn’t make it just. It should only be a crime if someone is actually harmed, or intended to be harmed.
Creating a work about a fictitious individual shouldn’t be illegal, regardless of how distasteful the work is.
It’s not a gray area at all. There’s an EU directive on the matter. If an image appears to depict someone under the age of 18 then it’s child porn. It doesn’t matter if any minor was exploited. That’s simply not what these laws are about.
Bear in mind, there are many countries where consenting adults are prosecuted for having sex the wrong way. It’s not so long ago that this was also the case in Europe, and a lot of people explicitly want that back. On the other hand, beating children has a lot of fans in the same demographic. Some people want to actually protect children, but a whole lot of people simply want to prosecute sexual minorities, and the difference shows.
17 year-olds who exchange nude selfies engage in child porn. I know there have been convictions in the US; not sure about Europe. I know that teachers have been prosecuted when minors sought help when their selfies were being passed around in school, because they sent the images in question to the teacher, and that’s possession. In Germany, the majority of suspects in child porn cases are minors. Valuable life lesson for them.
Anyway, what I’m saying is: We need harsher laws and more surveillance to deal with this epidemic of child porn. Only a creep would defend child porn and I am not a creep.
There’s not an epidemic of child porn.
There’s an epidemic of governments wanting greater surveillance powers over the Internet and it is framed as being used to “fight child porn”.
So you’re going to hear about every single case and conviction until your perception is that there is an epidemic of child porn.
“You can’t possibly oppose these privacy destroying laws, after all you’re not on the side of child porn are you?”
Same with misinformation. Where anything they disagree with, in good faith or not, is misinformation.
It’s all part of ‘manufacturing consent’.
There’s plenty of material out in academia about it (as always check your sources), if you want to get into the weeds
Legality is not the same as morality.
It’s not a gray area at all. There’s an EU directive on the matter. If an image appears to depict someone under the age of 18 then it’s child porn.
So a person that is 18 years old, depicted in the nude, is still a child pornographer if they don’t look their age? This gives judges and prosecutors too much leeway and I could guarantee there are right-wing judges that would charge a 25yo because it could believed they were 17.
In Germany, the majority of suspects in child porn cases are minors. Valuable life lesson for them.
Is it though? I don’t know about the penalties in Germany but in the US a 17yo that takes a nude selfie is likely to be put on a sex offender list for life and have their freedom significantly limited. I’m not against penalties, but they should be proportional to the harm. A day in court followed by a fair amount of community service should be enough of an embarrassment to deter them, not jail.
In Germany, if 14-18yolds make nude selfies then nothing happens, if they share it with their intimate partner(s) then neither, if someone distributes (that’s the key word) the pictures on the schoolyard then the law is getting involved. Under 14yolds technically works out similar just that the criminal law won’t get involved because under 14yolds can’t commit crimes, that’s all child protective services jurisdiction which will intervene as necessary. The general advise to kids given by schools is “just don’t, it’s not worth the possible headache”. It’s a bullet point in biology (sex ed) and/or social studies (media competency), you’d have to dig into state curricula.
Not sure where that “majority of cases” thing comes from. It might very well be true because when nudes leak on the schoolyard you suddenly have a whole school’s worth of suspects many of which (people who deleted) will not be followed up on and another significant portion (didn’t send on) might have to write an essay in exchange for terminating proceedings. Yet another reason why you should never rely on police statistics. Ten people in an elevator, one farts, ten suspects.
We do have a general criminal register but it’s not public. Employers generally are not allowed to demand certificates of good conduct unless there’s very good reason (say, kindergarten teachers) and your neighbours definitely can’t.
Sounds like some actual common sense was applied to German law. Good to hear.
That’s a directive, it’s not a regulation, and the regulation calling anyone under 18 a child does not mean that everything under 18 is treated the same way in actually applicable law, which directives very much aren’t. Germany, for example, splits the whole thing into under 14 and 14-18.
We certainly don’t arrest youth for sending each other nudes:
(4) Subsection (1) no. 3, also in conjunction with subsection (5), and subsection (3) do not apply to acts by persons relating to such youth pornographic content which they have produced exclusively for their personal use with the consent of the persons depicted.
…their own nudes, that is. Not that of classmates or whatnot.
Stanley_Pain@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
I think it’s pretty stupid. Borders on Thought Crime kind of stuff.
I’d rather see that kind of enforcement and effort go towards actually finding people who are harming children.
Inucune@lemmy.world 1 month ago
This is also my take: any person can set up an image generator and churn any content they want. Focus should be on actual people being trafficed and abused.
LodeMike@lemmy.today 1 month ago
Ehhhhh…
It also borders on real CSAM
shaggyb@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Paracetamol “borders on” poison, but isn’t.
Slippery slope is a logical fallacy, and there are actual consequences here. We need to do better.
raoulduke85@lemm.ee 1 month ago
There’s a few in the White House.