Child Pornography Legality
The cluster debates the legality of pornography, especially child pornography including fictional, drawn, or AI-generated depictions, under US laws, comparing it to other regulated content and discussing distribution to minors or content moderation.
Activity Over Time
Top Contributors
Keywords
Sample Comments
Pornography, CP, and other things are regulated in the US and they can't legally do what you suggest.
Fair enough. Would child porn be a valid comparison then? It's illegal to possess child porn. So should this reasoning fly?"Sir, this is NOT a pornographic image featuring a minor, it's just a very large number!"
Its already illegal to distribute pornographic material to children tho. Why shouldn't this be considered that?
To explain why the content seemingly evades the law: the article is consistently referring to drawn / computer generated content.The legality of which can be gleaned from here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_fictional_porn...I find that the seemingly intentional foot-noting of the class of content they are talking abou
> It says that it is illegal for a company to to give porn to kids.No it doesn't. It says "makes available sexually explicit material", which means any website or app that allows user-generated content.
Unless it's child porn, I think.
Did you read this section of the article:> The restrictions include several kinds of content that are illegal in the US, including sexualized depictions of minors and bestiality, as well as non-consensual depictions and deepfakes.This has nothing to do with being "more reasonable about the human body", as you euphemistically put it.
WTF? It is censored inherently with laws directed at it specifically, with crimes against production, distribution, and possesion. It is censored culturally as nearly any tech goon or housekeeper that finds it will report you (contrast with fraud or drugs).In plenty of U.S. states the age of consent is below the age at which pornographic images are legal. I really have no idea what point you're making.
I read that as no child porn. since I don't know that an image can be "in a manner that is obscene, sexually explicit," but the object of an image which would be a child in this case could be.But since it's a legal document the best thing to do is consult a lawyer.
Posting pornographic media with the intention of it being seen by an underage kid is a protected right?