which country is trying to ban those?
I know this is about 10 months later, but my thought is: if he had been “drawing underage characters”, that infers these were depictions of real children, and however the image is reproduced it would still count as “CP” of real children and not purely fictional content. I’m assuming if this is the case there would have been evidence/testimony that the drawn images were a true likeness of certain kids.
However, not sure about if the drawn images simply appear “too realistic”.
1 Like
Could it not fall under their obscenity law?
Article 235
A person who distributes, broadcasts, sells, publicly displays, or by other means to show an obscene writing, picture, audio record, video record, or any other object to another person shall be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than two years, short-term imprisonment, in lieu thereof, or in addition thereto, a fine of ninety thousand dollars may be imposed.
A person who with purpose to distribute, broadcast, or sell makes or possesses the obscene writing, picture, audio record, video record, or any other object shall be subject to same punishment.
The writing, picture, audio or video object shall be confiscated whether it belongs to the offender or not.
https://law.moj.gov.tw/ENG/LawClass/LawParaDeatil.aspx?pcode=C0000001&bp=33
You are talking about the “Mutzebacher” case here? You can read about it on Wikipedia:
It only has a japanese translation tho which is funny - try translator addons to read it.
Here is the summary translated by google:
The Mutzenbacher decision is a decision of the Federal Constitutional Court from 1990, in which the court persevered its interpretation of the guarantee of artistic freedom of the Basic Law of Article 5.3 of the Basic Law (GG) and found that pornography could also be art.
This decision makes it pretty hard to criminalize something like Manga when you take the culture around it and the artstyle into account.
As for Finland:
perfectly legal without any restrictions. It’s only illegal when it’s photorealistic, but even that can be legal if it has artistic or informational value.
I remember a case (Karttunen v. Finland) here in Helsinki where an artist downloaded a bunch of CSAM and put them on display in a museum.
Edit:
In Finland a “Child” is defined as a person, but since photorealistic images could depict a real child it’s a grey zone. Also, here is the source for more certainty:
Section 18 - Distribution of a sexually offensive picture (650/2004)
(1) A person who manufactures, offers for sale or for rent or otherwise offers or makes available, keeps available, exports, imports to or transports through Finland to another country, or otherwise distributes pictures or visual recording that factually or realistically depict
(1) a child,
(2) violence or
(3) bestiality
shall be sentenced for distribution of a sexually offensive picture to a fine or imprisonment for at most two years. (540/2011)
(2) An attempt is punishable.
(3) The provisions in section 17, subsection 2 apply also to the pictures and visu-
al recordings referred to in this section.
(4) A child is defined as a person below the age of eighteen years and a person whose age cannot be determined but whom there is justifiable reason to assume is below the age of eighteen years. The picture or visual recording is deemed factual in the manner referred to in subsection 1, paragraph 1, if it has been produced in a situation in which a child has actually been the object of sexually offensive conduct and realistic, if it resembles in a misleading manner a picture or a visual recording produced through photography or in another corresponding manner of a situation in which a child is the object of sexually offensive conduct. The definitions of the terms factual and realistic apply correspondingly in the cases referred to in subsection 1, paragraphs 2 and 3.
This also applies to Section 18 and is meant for realistic, or factual depictions:
(2) The provision in subsection 1 does not apply if the depiction of violence (child in this case) is to be deemed justifiable because of the informative nature or manifest artistic value
3 Likes
It’s legal in Saint Kitts and Nevis. They also offer their citizenship for a non-refundable investment of $150k, which is processed within 6 months (2 months if you pay $25k extra) and handed to you. All you need is the money and a clear criminal record.
(3) In this section:
child pornography includes material that visually depicts(a) a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct;
(b) a person who appears to be a minor engaged in sexually explicit
conduct; or(c) realistic images representing a minor engaged in sexually explicit
conduct;minor means a person under the age of 16 years.
§293 Criminal Code of Saint Kitts and Nevis
People with a UK citizenship can move there and buy property with a very low threshold. They then also get citizenship.
well if you get that realistic you might end up opening the debate over art. Which is a whole different rabbit hole. Either way if the stuff is to realistic you are in for a long court debate and huge legal fees.
(Side note if the content is based on real work the art debate probably won´t work)
Finland doesn’t even have a separate law for CSAM it’s just included in that broad law which makes it harder for others to judge what of those three you were convicted of (with the exception of the aggravated version). Also the max penalty with two years must be one of the lowest in the world.
Scandinavian is a prime example that prevention and a smart police is more than enough. Too many people are pleased with an increased penalty, so why bother increasing police and funding when you can just do that.
Mafia distribution of loli when? Italy's Updated Criminal Law Says Anime, Hentai, And Comics Are "Child Pornography"