Has anyone been charged for solely possessing/creating AI generated NSFW images of fictional characters without distributing?
Executive summary
Prosecutions exist for AI‑generated sexual images when they depict minors or when creators distribute them; federal prosecutors say AI CSAM is treated as CSAM and have charged people who produced, possessed, and distributed AI images of minors (DOJ press release) [1]. For purely adult, fictional characters the legal landscape is patchwork: some platforms allow fictional AI porn (Reddit) while state and international laws vary sharply on whether fictional depictions — especially those that “appear to be” minors or are “virtually indistinguishable” from real people — can be criminalized [2] [3] [4].
1. No mystery about AI CSAM — prosecutors treat it as child pornography
Federal law enforcement has publicly stated that AI‑generated child sexual abuse material is treated as child sexual abuse material and that it will pursue charges for producing, possessing and distributing such images; the DOJ announced an arrest charging a man with producing, distributing and possessing AI‑generated images of minors and emphasized “CSAM generated by AI is still CSAM” [1]. Reporting from state prosecutors shows the same practical result: prosecutors in California said existing reforms cleared the way to prosecute multiple AI‑generation matters [5] [6].
2. Possession alone can trigger charges — at least for images of minors
Sources show prosecutors bringing charges for possession of AI‑generated images of children: DOJ language and state statutes treat creation, possession and distribution of AI CSAM as criminal, and some state laws explicitly criminalize purely computer‑generated depictions that are “virtually indistinguishable” from real children [1] [3] [4]. Civil and criminal penalties have been deployed or threatened even when no real child was used in production [1] [4].
3. Adult fictional characters — legality depends on jurisdiction and facts
For adult, fictional characters the reporting and legal guides show a fractured picture. Platforms such as Reddit explicitly permit AI‑generated sexual media that depicts fictional characters [2]. Legal analysts and defense guides note that adults retain a right to possess obscene material in private under U.S. Supreme Court precedent except where child pornography is involved, but obscenity tests and state laws can still make certain content illegal to create, distribute, or possess if it crosses obscenity thresholds [7] [8].
4. States and statutes are closing loopholes — fictional doesn’t always mean legal
Several states and countries have enacted laws that sweep fictional depictions into criminal prohibitions. Texas’s statutes, for example, criminalize content that “appears to be” a child and bar images that are “virtually indistinguishable” from real children, while other jurisdictions (France, parts of the UK, and some U.S. states) have long criminalized fictional sexual depictions of minors [3] [4]. Advocacy groups chart that by 2025 many states criminalized AI‑generated CSAM in one form or another [9].
5. Key practical distinction: minors, likenesses, distribution and obscenity
Across sources the consistent risk factors that prompt prosecution are: any depiction of minors (real or convincingly fictional) [1] [4]; use of a real person’s likeness without consent (deepfakes) [10] [8]; distribution or intent to distribute sexually explicit material in jurisdictions where obscenity laws apply [11] [8]. Possession of adult, fictional NSFW images without distribution is less frequently cited as a basis for prosecution in the sources provided [2] [7].
6. Platforms and content policies diverge from criminal law
Platform rules may permit fictional‑character NSFW content even while laws in some jurisdictions ban similar images; Reddit’s explicit carve‑out allowing AI sexual media of fictional characters illustrates that content allowed by a platform can still run afoul of local statutes or criminal prosecutions in some regions [2]. Users cannot rely on platform permission as legal protection [2] [3].
7. What reporting does not say — limits of available sources
Available sources do not mention a clear, published case where someone in the U.S. was criminally charged solely for privately possessing or creating AI‑generated NSFW images of adult, fictional characters without distribution or use of a real‑person likeness. The reporting documents prosecutions tied to AI CSAM, distribution, or deepfake misuse, and statutes that make possession criminal for material that appears to be minors or is obscene — but no identified arrest solely for private possession of adult fictional NSFW images appears in these sources [1] [3] [4].
8. Bottom line for risk‑averse users
If images depict minors (or look like minors) or use real people’s likenesses without consent, prosecutors have shown they will bring charges for creation, possession and distribution [1] [3]. For adult fictional characters the legal risk is lower in some jurisdictions and platforms [2] [7], but the law is evolving quickly and state statutes, obscenity rules, and varying international laws can criminalize what platforms permit [3] [4]. Users should consult local counsel because available reporting shows rapid statutory change and aggressive enforcement around images involving minors and nonconsensual likenesses [1] [9].