|
|
|
|
|
by jstarfish
3064 days ago
|
|
> imagine when it’s AI generated, photorealistic rape, snuff, child porn. Illegal or not, if it’s purely virtual law enforcement is going to focus on the subset of crimes which involve actual human victims. In the US, all of that is already illegal. If you put yourself in a position where what you possess is indistinguishable from the real thing, the courts err on the side of the potential victim. Law enforcement's priorities are not going to change; they don't distinguish between what's virtual or not. If it looks like CP, you can't point to a producer with valid 2257 documentation and it isn't obviously a cartoon, you're cooked. |
|
The 2257 law follows the legal reasoning that as a porn producer, you have the burden of proving your innocence. You have to show the proof that the person in your image or video is a real, live _adult_ person, and if you cannot, it is assumed that the person is a real, live _child_ person.
A landmark case will come along where a jury will decide that this new technology introduces reasonable doubt into this thinking. When this happens, the _government_ will then have the burden of proving that the person in the video or image is a real, live _child_ person.