Judge says AI generated child porn may be protected by the first amendment

Federal prosecutors are appealing a Wisconsin judge’s ruling that, in some cases, possessing AI-generated child sexual abuse material (CSAM) is constitutionally protected. The decision could have significant legal implications, potentially limiting prosecutors’ ability to charge individuals for possessing AI-generated CSAM.

Last month, in response to a defendant’s motion to dismiss the charges, U.S. District Judge James D. Peterson allowed three of the charges to move forward but threw one out, saying the First Amendment protects the possession of “virtual child pornography” in one’s home. On March 3, prosecutors appealed.

SOURCE


Discover more from Florida Action Committee

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

37 thoughts on “Judge says AI generated child porn may be protected by the first amendment

  • March 28, 2025

    https://www.techpolicy.press/court-rules-that-constitution-protects-private-possession-of-aigenerated-csam/

    Here is a better arible on the subject; it also has links to a reasearch paper as well as to the ruling in US v Anderegg, Case: 3:24-cr-00050-jdp (WD WI, 2/13/2025)

    To review this, however, it is merely stating that mere possession of an AI-generated image one might consider as pornographic and depictiong what appears to be minors by use of an AI program is not an offense.

    HOWEVER, they’re going forward with the rest of the case, while includes creating the image and sending it to a minor.

    Reply
  • March 26, 2025

    I concur 100%.

    Reply
  • March 25, 2025

    Thats fine with me. But understand overstand and innerstand that much in the way of empathy will not be coming from me. But yes, I’m game for talk forum.

    Reply
    • March 25, 2025

      Ok. We will be in touch.

      Reply
  • March 25, 2025

    I don’t think anyone was using religion to justify abuse. There is no justification for abuse and we agree with that. I believe (and I don’t want to misinterpret, so I’m sorry if I am) that the post concerns how we treat one who has done wrong. There’s a choice to foster rehabilitation or eternal condemnation. Acknowledging that people eventually return to society, we want people to get better and do better. That holds true for victims and perpetrators. For perpetrators, constant ostracism, relegating them under bridges, and placing barriers that completely deprive a person from functioning, leaves them hopeless and with nothing to lose. Those feelings foster recidivism. Similarly, for victims, it’s horrible going through life carrying pain and anger to that level. It must be similarly difficult to function productively.

    I’m going to throw something out there, Mr D; we do a monthly member call. Would you consider being a guest, anonymously, and then also a registrant? We could invite a treatment provider who specializes in restorative justice to moderate. From you, the registrant might gain empathy, from the registrant, you might see that it’s possible to repent and do better. It might be healing for everyone involved, but it’s an opportunity for both sides to gain understanding of the other. At the end of the day, we all want to get better.

    Reply
    • March 25, 2025

      Well said.

      Reply
  • March 25, 2025

    I agree that we did get off topic but when you have someone using the bible and God to justify evil acts, i tend to strong against EVIL and excuses for it.

    Reply

Comment Policy

  • PLEASE READ: Comments not adhering to this policy will be removed.
  • Be patient. All comments are moderated before they are published. This takes time.
  • Stay on topic. Comments and links should be relevant to this post.
  • *NEW* CLICK HERE if you have an off-topic comment or link.
  • Be respectful. Do not attack, abuse, or threaten. This includes cussing/yelling (ALL CAPS).
  • Cite. If requested, cite any bold or novel claims of fact or statistics, or your comment may be moderated.
  • *NEW* Be brief. If you have a comment of over 2,000 characters, please e-mail it to us for consideration as a member submission.
  • Reminder: Opinions and statements in comments are neither endorsed nor verified by FAC.
  • Moderation does not equal censorship. See this post for more information

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *