What is the status, and what should be the status, of pornography that uses AI that doesn’t resemble any actual people, places etc.? AI that is completely written, drawn, animated or said without human guidance.
Is it still prosecutable…and who charged exactly and for what?
Some number of years ago, the SCOTUS ruled that “virtual” CSAM, specifically that in the movies Traffic and Lolita but, also more broadly, whether drawn or CGI or produced via some other means, is constitutionally protected free speech. I can’t seem to link on my phone but it’s Ashcroft v Free Speech Coalition.
Now, is Ashcroft broad enough to cover CSAM produced by AI, which wasn’t a thing at the time of the ruling? I say yes, but there are nine people in Washington with far more knowledge of the law than I have, who may yet be compelled to make a another decision. Will Ashcroft survive a challenge from this court? I don’t know. Will a guy caught with thousands of AI produced CSAM image and videos on his hard drive walk free? For now, it looks like the answer is yes.
Why should it be illegal?
AI porn involving AI children, AI animals or AI torture/death comes to mind.
INAperson who knows much about constitutional law.
As an artist and if I was doing AI as an art form(of some sort), I might be perturbed if my “creation” was deemed illegal. As an artist.
Now, whether it’s art or not is another debate.
Right, but your OP didn’t specify that. Those should be illegal, of course. But other subjects? I mean, it’s just another form of animation. If hentai is legal, then so is AI porn.
In my opinion, by any objective measure, animated porn is the least exploitive form of pornography, because it doesn’t involve actual people who may have been forced to take off their clothing and do unspeakable acts for money. As far as I’m concerned, the entire pornography industry can and should be replaced by AI.
There was already a law way back in 2003 (the PROTECT ACT) that made this illegal. It states that child porn is illegal even if made with computer alone and no actual humans were involved.
In the United States, there something called the Miller test.
That was derived from the 1973 court case Miller v. California. And in that case, SCOTUS determined that “obscenity”, which is not protected by the First Amendment, can be categorized if it satisfies these three criteria:
- whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest;
- whether the work depicts or describes, in an offensive way, sexual conduct or excretory functions, as specifically defined by applicable state law; and
- whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
I would expect that AI-generated CSAM, even when it portrays images of fictional children, satisfies those criteria and so could be regulated without falling under First Amendment protection.
I can’t remember her name, but there was a photographer who got in much trouble photographing her children nude, while swimming. She published those photographs in a big book of all her photography.
I believe it was a court case. I’ll look see can I find the name of this woman.
But the topic is AI porn that doesn’t involve humans.
Well, photography laws, if there are any might apply to AI art. Just a thought.
Carry on. I’ll back out.
But what is “community” in this time of the international internet?
Even photography involves real people, though.
You mean, like, elves?
Simple, the “community” consists of the citizens of whatever jurisdiction is creating a statue to criminalize this.
Interesting question. If an AI depiction of an otherwise human child adds pointed ears, does the claim that this “Elven” person is actually 80 years old and thus legally an adult hold up?
Which just mean that the depiction cannot be viewed in that community, right?
The Japanese have been arguing that for years.
And now we have to factor in the ability to create AI that might be indistinguishable from real life, and not just anime.
@Czarcasm I retrospect, I think I read the OP of your thread without reading its title. You weren’t asking whether AI porn in general should be illegal - you were asking whether AI porn with illegal subjects should be legal. That’s a different question.
(Re-read your OP - you have to admit it’s not very clear).