Members unicorn Posted January 18 Members Posted January 18 In today's issue of the Los Angeles Times, there was a notation that a cartoon was being pulled because its creator was arrested on felony charges. When I looked into it, I discovered he got arrested on child pornography charges. Apparently, there's a new law which took effect on 1/1/25 in California which makes AI child porn illegal, and the cartoonist got charged for violating that law. I'm not sure how I feel about that law, since I'm not sure who the "victim" would be in AI-generated porn. However, this should serve as a wake-up call to anyone who partakes in this habit: check your local laws. https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/california/cartoonist-arrested-child-porn/3762634/ "A Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist with Bay Area ties has been arrested in Sacramento County on suspicion of child pornography. Darrin Bell, 49, a famed cartoonist who got his start at UC Berkeley, was arrested Wednesday and booked into the Sacramento County jail on possession of child porn, according to Internet Crimes Against Children detectives who were tipped off by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children... The arrest is the first by Sacramento Valley ICAC in which possession of computer generated/AI child pornography was charged against the suspect. A change in the law took effect with the new year making AI-generated child pornography a criminal offense." floridarob 1 Quote
caeron Posted January 19 Posted January 19 I get the sentiment, but this makes me leery. It feels like it's crossing the border into thought crimes. Quote
Members unicorn Posted January 19 Author Members Posted January 19 19 minutes ago, caeron said: I get the sentiment, but this makes me leery. It feels like it's crossing the border into thought crimes. While child pornography is one of the most abhorrent crimes imaginable, using AI images, while highly distasteful, seems more nuanced, since it doesn't seem like anyone is being harmed. It will be interesting to see how the courts react. floridarob 1 Quote
Keithambrose Posted January 19 Posted January 19 2 hours ago, unicorn said: While child pornography is one of the most abhorrent crimes imaginable, using AI images, while highly distasteful, seems more nuanced, since it doesn't seem like anyone is being harmed. It will be interesting to see how the courts react. As I mentioned in a previous post, AI generated child porn is also illegal in the UK. It counts as an obscene image of a child. Quote
Members unicorn Posted January 20 Author Members Posted January 20 15 hours ago, Keithambrose said: As I mentioned in a previous post, AI generated child porn is also illegal in the UK. It counts as an obscene image of a child. I wonder how they determine the "age" of the subject of an AI image. I can think of a poster who posts AI images I consider of questionable taste. However, I don't know how one could "prove" the "age" of an image in such cases. I suspect that Bell's case will be well-publicized, and probably be examined by appellate courts. I suppose that if they can show that the images are morphed images of multiple minors, then that should pass muster and definitely be illegal. If no images of minors are used, I wonder if that could still be considered illegal. How long has this been illegal in the UK, and what have the courts said on this subject? Quote
Travelingguy Posted January 20 Posted January 20 AI generated images can be of real people doing things that they did not in fact do. I think that we are going to see more and more legislation on this. As for nobody being hurt, I am not at all sure of that. Also the consumers of this materiel would be among the most likely people in our society to have abused a child. Quote
Keithambrose Posted January 20 Posted January 20 14 hours ago, unicorn said: I wonder how they determine the "age" of the subject of an AI image. I can think of a poster who posts AI images I consider of questionable taste. However, I don't know how one could "prove" the "age" of an image in such cases. I suspect that Bell's case will be well-publicized, and probably be examined by appellate courts. I suppose that if they can show that the images are morphed images of multiple minors, then that should pass muster and definitely be illegal. If no images of minors are used, I wonder if that could still be considered illegal. How long has this been illegal in the UK, and what have the courts said on this subject? BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk Bolton man faces jail over AI-generated child abuse images Don't think the case has come to trial. Quote
Members unicorn Posted January 20 Author Members Posted January 20 This looks like legally untested waters, then. Interesting. Quote
Keithambrose Posted Sunday at 09:31 AM Posted Sunday at 09:31 AM The UK is going to anothervlevel on AI child pirn.AI-generated child sex abuse images targeted with new laws IMAGE SOURCE,GETTY IMAGES Image caption, Those who have been found to own AI "paedophile manuals" could be jailed for up to three years Sima Kotecha Senior UK Correspondent Published 2 hours ago Four new laws will tackle the threat of child sexual abuse images generated by artificial intelligence (AI), the government has announced. The Home Office says that, to better protect children, the UK will be the first country in the world to make it illegal to possess, create or distribute AI tools designed to create child sexual abuse material (CSAM), with a punishment of up to five years in prison. Possessing AI paeodophile manuals will also be made illegal, and offenders will get up to three years in prison. These manuals teach people how to use AI to sexually abuse young people. "We know that sick predators' activities online often lead to them carrying out the most horrific abuse in person," said Home Secretary Yvette Cooper. "This government will not hesitate to act to ensure the safety of children online by ensuring our laws keep pace with the latest threats." The other laws include making it an offence to run websites where paedophiles can share child sexual abuse content or provide advice on how to groom children. That would be punishable by up to 10 years in prison. And the Border Force will be given powers to instruct individuals who they suspect of posing a sexual risk to children to unlock their digital devices for inspection when they attempt to enter the UK, as CSAM is often filmed abroad. Depending on the severity of the images, this will be punishable by up to three years in prison. Artificially generated CSAM involves images that are either partly or completely computer generated. Software can "nudify" real images and replace the face of one child with another, creating a realistic image. In some cases, the real-life voices of children are also used, meaning innocent survivors of abuse are being re-victimised. Fake images are also being used to blackmail children and force victims into further abuse. The National Crime Agency (NCA) said it makes around 800 arrests each month relating to threats posed to children online. It said 840,000 adults are a threat to children nationwide - both online and offline - which makes up 1.6% of the adult population. Cooper said: "These four new laws are bold measures designed to keep our children safe online as technologies evolve. "It is vital that we tackle child sexual abuse online as well as offline so we can better protect the public," she added. Some experts, however, believe the government could have gone further. Prof Clare McGlynn, an expert in the legal regulation of pornography, sexual violence and online abuse, said the changes were "welcome" but that there were "significant gaps". The government should ban "nudify" apps and tackle the "normalisation of sexual activity with young-looking girls on the mainstream porn sites", she said, describing these videos as "simulated child sexual abuse videos". These videos "involve adult actors but they look very young and are shown in children's bedrooms, with toys, pigtails, braces and other markers of childhood," she said. "This material can be found with the most obvious search terms and legitimises and normalises child sexual abuse. Unlike in many other countries, this material remains lawful in the UK." IMAGE SOURCE,BENJAMIN CREMEL/PA WIRE Image caption, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said the UK will be the first country in the world to make Quote
Members unicorn Posted Sunday at 07:37 PM Author Members Posted Sunday at 07:37 PM I'm 100% behind locking up those who use AI to nudify images of real children, as well as any "how to" manuals. However, it's not fair nor a good idea to criminalize making videos with adult actors who simply "look very young." Locking such people up simply costs society, in absence of a real victim. Quote
