US judge ruled AI-generated child sexual abuse material is protected by First Amendment.

cross-posted from: https://piefed.world/c/tech/p/1368970/judge-ruled-ai-generated-child-sex-abuse-material-is-protected-by-first-amendment

reason.com/volokh/2026/08/27/home-possession-of-ai-generated-porn-depicting-fake-children-remains-constitutionally-protected-seventh-circuit-rules/

Controversial opinion: If there is no real child whose likeness is used to produce the image, then there is no real victim. The art that is created is of the same quality as a drawing from imagination.

The other problem with illegalizing content on the basis of whether it’s CSAM is the eternal question of whether an unreal likeness can be said to even have an age. How would you be able to prove with certainty that an AI-generated likeness was below the age of consent? You would think it would be obvious, but there is a huge gray area here. If the protection weren’t fairly strong, I 100% guarantee that conservative Bible-thumpers would take advantage of the opportunity to ban all ai pornographic content, and then move on to real porn after that.

In addition, Banning AI material we might be able to interpret as CSAM does nothing to protect real children. There is no empirical proof that any kind of porn has a real, independent effect on people’s sexual behavior.

Edit with addendum: In addition, civil rights are a matter of principle. It doesn’t matter whether the presence of AI generated material makes the job of policing more difficult. The Bill of Rights was created to try to make sure that we don’t become slaves. Just because something is highly offensive to my own tastes doesn’t mean that the civil rights of the person who offends me disappear.

As it has been said there was clearly some way it was trained. But for the moment let’s set that argument aside because it has been argued. (Children were hurt in its creation)

What do you think will happen as more creeps do it and use it. They will develop a taste for it and will eventually need the real thing. It will end with kids being hurt.

You can think whatever you want about what creeps may or may not do hypothetically, until you’ve got actual evidence those thoughts are worthless

Evidence? You mean other than the extensive research, clinical tests, personal stories and confessions of offenders?

Anything’s possible when you make shit up. You don’t have research to support the claim that viewing any sort of pornographic material leads to behaviors depicted in that material, personal stories and confessions are not even close to the same thing as research and the fact that you bothered listing them together tells me that you’re a fucking moron

My dude anything is possible when you gatekeep information. You’re defending making child sexual abuse material (SCAM).

This is what the entire case was sort of about, and also explicitly not about. Does it harm children and the answer was the first amendment. That’s not really an answer. Honestly this isn’t a problem for the courts to figure out it’s a legislative problem and good luck with that.

My personal opinion, no one should be able to create any sexualized content of children regardless of whether or not it’s AI generated, authentic CSAM, hand drawn art, or anything else. Children should not be sexualized, I can’t believe this is up for debate.