4 ms·

You are certainly right and there is good reason for that, however, it's worth noting that in the U.S., at least as per Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition [1], s

• rootusrootus 2y ago
  Thanks for the cite; I was very sure that simulated CSAM was just as illegal as the real deal, so I appreciate the correction. I wonder if deepfake technology is going to change our stance on that. With enough motivation Congress could take it out of the hands of SCOTUS.
• causal 2y ago
  Did you completely miss this section? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashcroft_v._Free_Speech_Coalition#Attempts_to_supersede_(and_superseding_by_PROTECT_Act) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashcroft_v._Free_Speech_Coal...
  • Kranar 2y ago
    No, I was careful to not make any absolutist claim and even provided a reference for people to read further. Pornography in general is subject to the Miller test, so it should not be surprising that simulated CSAM is also subject to the Miller test as well.
• rendang 2y ago
  "simulated CSAM" is a strange term - "CSAM" itself could be read as a dysphemism of CP whose purpose is less to emphasize the heinous nature of the abuse involved, and more to defend "ordinary" pornography as licit by putting a semantic distance between it and child porn. But of course if it is simulated, there is no abuse going on so the term becomes meaningless.
  • Kranar 2y ago
    > "CSAM" itself could be read as a dysphemism of CP whose purpose is less to emphasize the heinous nature of the abuse involved Maybe it could be read that way by some, but that's not why the term was adopted and it's not why the term is advocated for by anti-sexual violence organizations. https://inhope.org/EN/articles/child-sexual-abuse-material https://inhope.org/EN/articles/child-sexual-abuse-material https://www.rainn.org/news/what-child-sexual-abuse-material-csam https://www.rainn.org/news/what-child-sexual-abuse-material-... https://www.thorn.org/blog/decoding-the-language-of-child-sexual-exploitation-acronyms-to-know/ https://www.thorn.org/blog/decoding-the-language-of-child-se... As for the fact that making it simulated renders the term meaningless, the entire point of a simulation is that it is not the actual thing that is happening but rather an imitative representation of something that could be real. Presumably the abuse towards a child could be real, and hence it's possible to imitate that abuse in various forms of media. It is that imitation that constitutes the simulation. If you argue that it makes the term meaningless, then you must accept that the simulation of anything is meaningless.
    • Eisenstein 2y ago
      > If you argue that it makes the term meaningless, then you must accept that the simulation of anything is meaningless. I think that what is being argued. Put 'simulated' in front of any legal term and it becomes meaningless for its legal usage. 'Simulated larceny' is meaningless. 'Simulated murder' is meaningless.
      • Kranar 2y ago
        Yeah, good luck simulating a terrorist attack at an airport, or simulating legal tender, or simulating a police officer. There are plenty of laws that make it an offense to perform a simulation. Nitpicking the term simulation as being meaningless, whether in a legal context or otherwise, isn't a particularly noteworthy discussion to have. I think most people understand the meaning of simulated CSAM and can have an opinion on whether it should be legal or illegal without being pedantic about the word "simulated".