What laws govern filming pornographic material in France in 2024?
Executive summary
France in 2024 permits the production of pornographic material but under a tightening legal regime focused on protecting minors, enforcing age verification for online distribution, criminalizing certain non‑consensual uses of imagery (including deepfakes), and applying existing criminal prohibitions to violent or exploitative shoots; the central legislative vehicle is the SREN law (Law No. 2024‑449) and its delegated enforcement powers to Arcom [1] [2] [3]. The practical effect for people filming porn in France is a mix of digital access controls, reinforced consent and anti‑abuse rules, and continuing scrutiny about whether filmed acts that constitute violence or exploitation are legally permissible [4] [5].
1. What the SREN law changed: age verification and platform powers
The 2024 Law to secure and regulate the digital space (SREN, Law No. 2024‑449 of 21 May 2024) made effective measures from 1 January 2024 to require age‑verification systems for services broadcasting pornographic content and empowered the audiovisual regulator Arcom to set technical standards, request audits of age checks, and ultimately order blocking or de‑indexing measures against non‑compliant websites or video platforms [1] [2] [6]. Arcom’s standard-setting mandate was followed by publication and consultation in 2024 and the authority can require sites to present a non‑pornographic screen until age is verified and to undergo independent audits of their solutions [7] [8] [9].
2. Consent, non‑consensual imagery and deepfakes: new criminal rules
The SREN package amended the French Criminal Code to explicitly outlaw sharing algorithmically generated or altered visual/audio content that depicts a person without their consent — with special aggravation for pornographic deepfakes — and supplemented existing rules on revenge porn, closing a prior gap for AI‑generated montages [4]. These changes make it a criminal offense to distribute non‑consensual pornographic depictions produced or manipulated by AI and reinforce that consent requirements are central to lawful production and distribution [4].
3. Minors, warnings and content depicting sexual violence
Beyond age verification, SREN imposes obligations to protect children and to warn viewers: platforms must prevent minors’ access and, where content simulates rape, sexual assault or child sexual imagery, broadcasters must display warnings before and during the content reminding viewers of the illegal nature of the behaviour portrayed [7]. Authorities have contemplated and begun implementing time‑limited blocking orders on intermediaries (ISPs, DNS, search engines) with a 48‑hour response window to takedown requests tied to protecting minors [7] [6].
4. Existing criminal law and the limits on “what may be filmed”
Independent of SREN, French criminal law already constrains pornographic production where acts amount to assault, torture, sexual exploitation or trafficking; government watchdog reports and prosecutors have argued that a large proportion of online pornographic material contains verbal or physical violence that could contravene existing criminal statutes, and some content has been classified as forbidden to minors or given specific ratings [5] [10]. Journalism and official reviews have pushed the view that contracts cannot legalize acts amounting to torture or trafficking, signaling prosecutions are possible where shoots involve real violence or exploitation [5] [11].
5. Practical obligations for producers and gaps in the reporting
Practically, producers are expected to obtain express written consent from performers and to avoid creating or distributing non‑consensual manipulations; online distributors must implement Arcom’s age‑verification standards and may face blocking measures if they fail to protect minors [12] [8] [9]. Reporting documents the robust enforcement framework for online access control and new criminal provisions for deepfakes, but available sources do not provide a single consolidated code of production‑stage obligations (e.g., licensing, workplace inspections, porn‑industry‑specific labor rules) beyond these consent, child‑protection and criminal provisions, so definitive claims about every administrative requirement on‑set (beyond consent and compliance with criminal law) cannot be made from the cited material [1] [4] [7].
6. Political context and enforcement tensions
The SREN law emerged amid political pressure to go beyond EU rules and to assert national control over online harms; parliamentary debates and Conseil d’État interventions reflect tensions about the law’s territorial reach and the balance between administrative blocking and judicial oversight, and the Conseil d’État has already been involved in disputes about implementation and the age‑verification order [13] [14]. That context explains why enactment emphasized platform obligations and criminal penalties for non‑consensual uses rather than producing a novel wholesale ban on adult filming — enforcement focuses on protecting minors, preventing exploitation, and penalizing non‑consensual distribution [1] [4] [5].