https://mnews.sbs.co.kr/news/endPage.do?newsId=N1007812289
Die jüngsten Gesetzesänderungen sehen eine Gefängnisstrafe von bis zu drei Jahren für das bloße Betrachten von sogenanntem „sexuell ausbeuterischem Material“ vor." wenn sie wissen, dass es "sexuell ausbeuterisches Material."
Unabhängig von der Angemessenheit der "Kriminalität beobachten," das Gesetz scheint gefährlich abstrakt und vage.
Oder vielleicht haben koreanische Polizisten und Richter die Fähigkeit, Gedanken zu lesen
South Korea's parliament is trying to create a "viewing crime"
byu/yukari-san_desu inkorea
3 Comments
Your description of the article does not match the content of the article.
The article is saying:
“National Assembly is working on the legislation that criminalizes **knowingly** viewing and possessing sexually exploitative **deepfake pornography”**.
This is very different from criminalizing “viewing any sexually exploitative material” as you are putting, which doesn’t sound like what is happening.
For those who can’t read Korean here is what ChatGPT says:
The article translates to:
“Possession or viewing of deepfake sexual exploitation materials, even with knowledge of their nature, will be punishable… Passed by the Legislation and Judiciary Committee.”
A bill that allows for imprisonment of those who knowingly possess or view deepfake sexual exploitation materials passed the National Assembly’s Legislation and Judiciary Committee today (25th). The committee held a full meeting today and passed an amendment to the Special Act on the Punishment of Sexual Violence Crimes (Sexual Violence Punishment Act), which includes these provisions. Since the amendment was processed with bipartisan agreement, it is expected to pass smoothly in the plenary session on the 26th. The main point of the amendment is the establishment of a crime for possessing, purchasing, storing, or viewing false videos, including deepfake sexual exploitation materials, punishable by up to three years of imprisonment or a fine of up to 30 million won.
So based on just this translation it sounds like it’s aimed at deepfakes but if the language in the bill is vague enough it could be related to pornography as well.
This type of legislation is in discussion in many governments at the moment. Nobody knows how to deal with the issue. Your title and description are wrong. Did you read the article?