https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/brit-student-caught-pics-bart-30131355
"it's AI generated" will NOT be tolerated as an excuse, you sick fucks. EVEN for cartoon characters.
British student ARRESTED for AI generating porn of Bart Simpson
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/brit-student-caught-pics-bart-30131355
"it's AI generated" will NOT be tolerated as an excuse, you sick fucks. EVEN for cartoon characters.
Wait cartoon porn can be illegal in Britain? Huh.
I am reporting you now to UK police
Only if you don't have the proper licenses
Man, and I thought Americans were obsessed with black people.
I go to London and people won't stop asking me if I have my BBC license or not. Jesus.
.>tfw amerifat
>Tfw you probably broke the law in uk sometime in the past with cartoon porn.
If it's of someone or a character who's underage, yes.
Stay halal brother
its illegal in most first world countries because they understand its used to groom children and often found along side real child porn. can't say much about the third world/communist countries
good one anon
No, it isn't. Only anglo countries have this hysteria about drawings, the US is only safe thanks to the 1st amendment, otherwise it would be banned there too.
everything is, the queen is sensitive
> the queen
Should we tell him bros?
We have lived to see a retarded king.
the only country it's explicitly legal in is, I shit you not, israel
Yes. They probably didn't mean to make Simpsons rule 34 illegal. Its probably just to make a foolproof law against people running real CP through a photoshop filter and claiming its a drawing. Also a decent way to catch people who have real CP
>running real CP through a photoshop filter and claiming its a drawing
this is why we can't have nice things
>That's an awfully detailed floor you've got there
I feel like having that on your HDD would raise some eyebrows whether or not it was legal or not.
What do you think my girlfriend would say if she saw my stash of dubiously legal high-resolution floor images?
I have thousands of images of floor tiles
Meanwhile in 'murica, cartoon CP is classified as obscenity depending on "Whether a reasonable person finds that the matter, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value."
Sauce: https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/citizens-guide-us-federal-law-obscenity
AI Winter can't come soon enough.
if you're not a member of the royal family, house of lords, or church of england, yes
why would cartoon porn be prohibited?
Court case ruled that any pornography depicting a minor, real or not, is CP.
Stickmen too?
DON'T EAT MY SHORTS, MAN!
>britbong cops care more about cartoons than real kids being raped by foreigner rape gangs
I dont think any nation on the planet has worse cops than britbongs. They are completely usles and only serve as a way for establishment to fuck with average poeple.
how did they even find it
picrel isn't a meme anymore
I read the whole article and I still can't tell if it's real or a gag.
it's real, this kind of wacko shit is common in britain for some reason
No images no crime. Show the evidence.
>oiy, should'a apploied fo' a loicense ye should'a... now its twentay years in da slammah fo you.
>drawings are illegal in Britain
Yeah, this isn't news. Reminder that the British police raided an art museum to destroy this guy's work because they decided that it was child porn:
https://www.artnet.com/artists/graham-ovenden
Kinda looks like it is...
>Art is porn
This is your brain on BOT.
Porn is art
they were right.
I hate UK gays. I hope they all die, fucking get replaced with mudslimes. Fuck Churchill. Heil Hitler.
>mudslimes
chup chamaar
back to inch
Ugly as fuck. Westerners can't into e-boi.
art is supposed to be ugly, at least that's what untalented individuals focus on because they can't create beauty.
It really does. It's quite impressive in that sense.
because it is
shit looks ai generated
>picting a minor, real or not, is CP.
>>>
>Anonymous 06/01/23(Thu)20:15:57 No.938
it kinda is... that guy painted the girls who he abused.
No, it's the other way around. The court decided that painting them was abuse.
He didn't abuse anyone you absolute moron
Bart get out I'm piss.
Damn came here to post this
Doesn't Bart have his cock out in the movie? Why didn't they arrest everyone involved in that movie?
i just looked it up and I saw bart's penis on youtube
It was kinda just an outline
Also there is a distinction between CP and nude images of minors.
Images specifically created to arouse or excite is porn and that is where the crime is. Having an outline of barts dick as a gag about convenient censoring doesn't really cross the line of porn.
How do they know the AI Bart porn wasn't meant as shock humor?
because they came to it
Things tend to be up to interpretation, honestly the fact this is prosecuted just shows how backwards the priorities are of British law enforcement.
The kid pleaded guilty so he didn't put up any defense and more than likely got a very light sentence because of his plea. Depending on the quality of the images generated he could have put up a defense saying that the images where of no pornographic value but IDK how the UK defines what is porn, if it's either completely up for interpretation or there has to be some objective measure of intent and substance.
Would childrens feet be considered porn if the producer was obviously using it in a sexual manner?
:^)
(pats the seat)
come sit in the seat anon. let's review some text messages.
You could have just saved time by typing "because a garden gnome made it/made money off of it"
>Da JOOOOOOZ
I hope youll remember this post when the democrats arrest you for hatespeech chud
barsinso
Now the weird thing is, if he generated furry Bart Simpson it would have been completely legal.
Why the fuck did this retard (who sounds like a korean tbh) have 49 images of bart porn lol
It doesn't say that he did. It says that he has at least one picture of Bart getting sucked off by Marge, and 49 "similar images." "Similar" probably just means other Simpsons porn, possibly other cartoon porn in general. Also, it's not AI generated; this isn't a new case. He just had his sentencing today after being charged three years ago. Presumably his hearing has been delayed several times due to covid.
ay carumba
>oi, got a loicence for that shota?
Just a friendly reminder that the US isn't less retarded on this issue, which it's stupid "obscenity laws".
https://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/08/us/08brfs-OBSCENITYSEN_BRF.html
>pled guilty
She literally didn't even challenge the constitutionality of her charges. Literally every time someone gets arrested for e-boi/shota, they either happen to also have literal CP, and the e-boi/shota is a footnote, or it's shit like this where she pled fucking guilty. We've already had a SCOTUS case arguing that "virtualized" CP isn't CP and isn't obscene, but just because you have a constitutional right to something doesn't mean the government's not going to violate it when you're literally rolling over and taking it.
The thing is that even if you challenge the constitutionality and win, your life was already ruined the moment you got arrested.
This is Britain we're talking about. They ban e-boi/shota. AI generating e-boi/shota doesn't make it stop being e-boi/shota. Here in the US, things are different. Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition makes them legal. This would apply whether it's drawn by hand or generated by an AI. And if you don't believe it's legal in the US, I would like to remind you that you are on a website hosted in the US that openly permits e-boi and shota to be posted (albeit only on /b/) and has yet to be taken down by authorities despite being a very larger website that many would love to see shut down. Not only that, but as I post this, there is a e-boi thread on the front page of /b/, and also an AI generated porn thread which contains AI generated e-bois. Neither violates the rules because they are placed on the appropriate board and do not violate US law.
haha
Literal 1984
Take digital privacy seriously and you can enjoy your life without the government getting into your business.
Just air gap your generation station and crunch all numbers in local. In Minecraft.
uk is collapsing.
>Certain combinations of brush strokes on a canvas are illegal
God I really fucking hate obscenity laws
Including pic to get any Brit viewing this thread arrested
better post mitsudomoe
but enough about the Akamatsu clan.
What if I make a cartoon character that people draw porn of and then I say "oh btw she's 17" would the artists then get arrested?
What would happen if you asked an AI to draw Bart Simpson and it decided to draw porn of him on its own? You know how finicky AI can be with prompts.
UK is a totalitarian fascist state
>investigating break ins? nah
>investigating thefts? nah
>investigating simpson porn? that's the one
He should have just drugged and raped a few dozen children, then the police would be intimidating the rape victims instead of charging him.
Why did the police raid this guy's home though? Did he post the pictures on a British AI coomer forum or something?
Probably was using a discord/collab and someone reported him.
I bet he was in trouble for something completely unrelated. The stupid thing about these laws is you can find the same things on rule34 sites, here, twitter, reddit, etc and the gov isn't making any attempts to stop it. You're only prosecuted if you're being prosecuted for something else which is kinda fucked in a way.
>I bet he was in trouble for something completely unrelated.
I really don't believe so. The bolice don't just go to your house with a search warrant and seize your electronics for forensic investigation specifically.
>airstrip one
This is the same place that requires photo ID of an adult to purchase fucking spoons.
>Simpsons porn
He should be on the sex offender registry for extremely shit taste
Oh shit, this is getting seriou-
>Britain
Every day, I thank god for being born in italy, a state where the government is so slow that they still communicate through FAX
Is e-boi illegal in Italy?
>Italy
Yes if it's a realistic drawing, unclear when it's an obvious cartoon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_child_pornography
>He must pay a £114 surcharge.
To whom? Bart?
Maybe he was ordered to draw himself handing over the money to Bart? Would be an interesting concept. Imagine a world where it was mandatory that anyone who drew their OCs impregnating fictional characters needed to draw themselves handing over child support
The fact that real 'p is illegal anywhere is sad.
>what are you in here for, boy?
>I used artificial intelligence to generate explicit images of Bart Simpson
Oh shit, guess I better delete the simpsons movie off my hard drive then...
MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOODS
>An example of one image was computer generated of a male child, effectively a cartoon. It’s one cartoon that may be known to the court.
>It’s effectively Bart Simpson.
>He continued: That’s effectively what these images are, they are cartoon images of children and adults.
>The defendant comes before the court with no convictions or cautions. The maximum sentence is three years.
As an attorney myself I'd have taken his case just for the kek of it.
So is the simpsons movie now illegal in bri-in? His dick was shown in it.
She did, however, note there were “some points of concern” in the pre-sentence report written looking into his behaviour.
He pleaded guilty at South Tyneside Magistrates’ Court to possession of the prohibited images of children from February 19, 2019, and August 4, 2020.
> Moon, 23, faced up to three years behind bars and a spell on the sex offenders register for his crime.
> He avoided both after a court heard no real child was involved, he had not distributed the images, his offence was committed three years ago and he had not reoffended. Moon was given a 12-month community order, containing 20 days of rehabilitative work with the Probation Service. Moon must also pay a £114 victim surcharge.
Plus VAT.
>3 years ago
>AI
?
It wasn't AI, OP made that up.
Oh. I really oughtta leave this place and stick to books. Too much retards and fake news.
>He avoided both after a court heard no real child was involved
>£114 victim surcharge
Then who was victim?
But how did they even find out?