Editorial
A teenage boy in Valencia, Spain, allegedly used AI to fabricate and sell nude deepfakes of at least 16 female classmates. Each image stitched together from nothing more than school portraits and social media posts. No lens ever clicked, yet the psychological damage was instant, the humiliation indelible and the legal system largely powerless. This is the new terrain of abuse: synthetic exploitation without a shutter, where the harm is real but the evidence is virtual.
The same qualities that make AI revolutionary — accessibility, adaptability, sophistication — also make it a force multiplier for abuse, automating production and distribution while obscuring accountability. Platforms like X’s Grok, with its Spicy mode capable of generating sexualized images, reveal the unsettling collision between technological novelty and legal ambiguity. US law has already ruled that AI-generated content cannot be copyrighted or “owned” by AI, yet lawmakers remain divided on whether anyone should be held criminally responsible when those same systems produce synthetic child sexual abuse material or non-consensual pornography.
This gap is more than a legal technicality, it is the fracture line where platform policy, intellectual property law and human rights collide. As the number of AI-generated sexual abuse images reported to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC) surges, and as the European Union tightens its definitions under Europol’s cybercrime framework, the US remains stalled in determining whether such content should be prosecuted like real-world exploitation.
The result: an expanding zone of impunity where those harmed cannot seek justice, and those responsible can hide behind the claim that “the image never existed.”
GenAI Has Spurred an Industrialization of Abuse
The emergence of generative artificial intelligence has transformed the landscape of child sexual exploitation. Predators no longer require direct access to victims or illicit material; instead, they can manufacture hyper-realistic sexual images from benign photographs using open-source AI models like Stable Diffusion and LoRA fine-tunes trained on scraped child imagery.
Europol warned that “the very DNA of organized crime is changing” as networks adopt AI to automate abuse production, expand distribution and obscure accountability.
NCMEC reported a 1,325% increase in AI-generated child sexual abuse material (AIG-CSAM) between 2023 and 2024 — rising from approximately 4,700 to over 67,000 reports. These figures underrepresent the true scope, as many victims never discover their likeness has been exploited. Digital permanence compounds the harm: once shared, synthetic abuse images can be replicated infinitely, beyond the reach of takedown requests or court orders.
Related Article: Do AI Plagiarism Detectors Work? Here's What the Research Says
Why US Law Struggles to Prosecute AI-Generated Abuse
Under current US federal law, prosecution for synthetic CSAM often depends on the image being “virtually indistinguishable” from reality (18 U.S.C. § 2256). This standard means many AI-generated depictions, particularly those that are stylized or slightly altered, escape criminal liability despite their devastating impact. A decision not to charge offenders mirrors this gap in many jurisdictions: because no “real” minor was present during creation, the law hesitates to act.
In 2024, NCMEC’s CyberTipline received 20.5 million reports of suspected child sexual exploitation — a reduction from 36.2 million in 2023. However, “bundling” duplicate reports revealed 29.2 million unique incidents. These included 62.9 million files, 33.1 million videos, 28 million images and nearly 2 million other file types. Each tied to a suspected victim.
Policy changes also shifted the detection landscape. The REPORT Act (2024) expanded mandatory reporting obligations for suspected child exploitation and lengthened evidence retention requirements, while the Take It Down Act (2025) criminalized the non-consensual distribution of intimate images, including AI-generated ones, and mandated platform removal within 48 hours. Yet these measures rely on victims or third parties to detect and report the content, a near-impossible task given the speed and anonymity of distribution networks.
Meanwhile, state laws remain inconsistent. Texas (S.B. 20) criminalizes AI-generated images of minors outright, while Michigan imposes fines and jail terms for any creation or distribution of deepfakes. Many states, however, have no explicit statutes. This patchwork framework forces victims to navigate uneven protections and fragmented enforcement. As federal AI policy stalls, and with some leaders pledging to resist state-level AI regulation, crimes of this nature continue to proliferate unchecked.
How ‘Sharenting’ Creates a Pipeline for AI Abuse
The synthetic abuse pipeline often begins not in dark corners of the internet, but in daylight. Birthday photos, first-day-of-school portraits, family dance videos and YouTube vlogs form a massive, easily harvested archive that trains AI to recreate children’s faces with disturbing precision. Known as sharenting, the practice of publicly posting identifiable images of minors, often from birth, has created a silent supply chain for synthetic exploitation.
Offenders often start with public, everyday content: school yearbooks, sports team rosters, Instagram posts. “Sharenting,” the widespread parental posting of children’s images, has become a silent supply chain for synthetic exploitation. A study by The Journal of Pediatrics found that 81% of children in Western countries have some sort of online presence before the age of two.
These photographs can be scraped into model training datasets or directly used as seeds for explicit AI outputs with minimal technical skill. Once generated, these images move quickly into closed networks: Telegram channels, dark web forums and encrypted file shares. Detection tools like Microsoft’s PhotoDNA or Deepware Scanner exist, but are often unavailable to parents, educators and smaller police departments, tilting the technological advantage toward offenders.
Why Digital Consent Starts With Parents and Guardians
When incorporated into models, these photographs become the foundation for synthetic CSAM, pornographic content that appears real, trained on real childhood moments.
Yet the problem is not just technical, it is cultural. Every time a user clicks “accept” on a privacy policy without reading it, shares a video of their toddler dancing in a swimsuit or uploads school photos to a public feed, they are feeding an ecosystem designed for extraction, not protection. The responsibility to shield children cannot rest on policy alone, it requires a modification of digital behavior, especially among those closest to them.
This is not victim-blaming. It is a call for informed consent in the digital age.
Parents, educators and guardians must understand that sharing a child’s image online is not a neutral act, it is a permanent contribution to an invisible infrastructure that can, and often will, be exploited. Platforms must do far more to prevent scraping, watermark children’s content and provide automated warnings before minors' images are uploaded. But adults, too, must begin to treat a child’s digital presence with the same protection and care as their physical safety.
Related Article: The AI Doppelgänger Era: Who Controls Your Digital Identity?
Schools in Crisis: Deepfakes Targeting Students
Educational institutions are increasingly targeted in these crimes. Between 2023 and 2024, at least ten US schools reported incidents where students created explicit deepfakes of classmates as young as twelve. Teachers described feeling “utterly ill-prepared,” with no training, legal clarity or tools to respond. Source images were often innocuous: a class portrait, a TikTok dance clip, an Instagram selfie.
The consequences are severe. Even when images are synthetic, victims face ongoing harassment, reputational harm and psychological trauma. Because these depictions may not meet the federal “virtually indistinguishable” threshold, they are often excluded from CSAM statutes, leaving victims without meaningful recourse. By the time schools or parents discover the content, it has typically been replicated across dozens of private channels.
The Gender Bias Driving AI-Fueled Exploitation
Deepfake pornography is overwhelmingly a gendered form of abuse, targeting women and girls with near-total exclusivity. According to the eSafety Commissioner, 98% of all online deepfake content is pornographic, and 99% of that content depicts women and girls.
Investigative reporter Emanuel Maiberg observed that “it is almost exclusively young women who are nonconsensually being undressed and put into AI-generated porn.” This bias is embedded in the technology itself: generative models often replicate societal stereotypes, and the datasets used to train nudification tools are predominantly scraped from pornographic websites that overwhelmingly feature female bodies. The result is a systemically skewed abuse pipeline, producing output that sexualizes women and girls while amplifying harm against groups already at risk.
American lawmakers have yet to mount an adequate response to this accelerating problem. In January, pop singer Taylor Swift became the target of sexually explicit deepfakes that circulated widely on social media, thrusting the issue into international headlines. One image posted on X was viewed 47 million times before the account was suspended. Despite the scale of the harm, there is still no federal law directly regulating AI-generated pornography.
Webinar
Oct
16
Agentic AI Playbook: Real-World Customer Service Use Cases You Can Deploy Now
Boost self-service by 30% and slash call volume by 63% with agentic AI.
Register
Webinar
Oct
22
Beyond Storage: Smarter Content, Bigger Impact with DAM + AI
Discover how the DAM + AI duo makes content smarter, stronger and more accessible.
Register
Webinar
Nov
6
Fix the Content Bottleneck: Build a Better WebOps Strategy
Content stalled? Dev overloaded? You’re not the only one. Learn how streamlined WebOps bridges the publishing gap.
Register
Webinar
On demand
CMS Briefing: A Live Look at What’s Next in AI-Driven Platforms
Learn how leading organizations are using AI‑driven tools to publish faster, personalize smarter and stay secure.
Watch Now
Webinar
On demand
Ready or Not: How Data-First Organizations Are Unlocking Agentforce Potential
Learn how to cut through the noise, activate Agentforce and build a Salesforce AI strategy that actually delivers.
Watch Now
Webinar
On demand
AI in Customer Service: Faster Resolutions, Happier Customers
Don’t let rising demand burn out your team. See how to build a smarter, more resilient support org.
Watch Now
Congress is reviewing proposed legislation, and at least ten states have enacted bans, but progress remains slow. For much of the public, the phenomenon is unfamiliar, and regulatory frameworks have lagged far behind the pace of technological advancement. Whether due to deference to the “innovation of AI industry” or simple legislative inertia, the delay leaves victims exposed in real time to a form of digital violence that grows more sophisticated with every passing month.
What It Will Take to Stop AI-Driven Exploitation
The current legal and policy landscape fails victims on three fronts: inadequate federal statutes, fragmented and inconsistent state protections and the absence of meaningful platform accountability. Closing these gaps requires coordinated, multi-level action:
- Federal and International Law Reform: Establish clear statutes that criminalize all AI-generated child sexual abuse material (CSAM) and non-consensual pornography, regardless of the degree of realism or whether the image depicts an actual event.
- Platform Liability: Mandate enforceable “safety-by-design” standards, including default suppression of sexually explicit material, proactive detection and removal of abusive content and transparent reporting protocols.
- Education and Prevention: Integrate digital safety curricula into K–12 and higher education, with dedicated modules on deepfake technology, consent and online exploitation.
- Sharenting Restraint: Recognize the public posting of children’s images as a security vulnerability, applying privacy controls and informed consent practices to reduce the raw material available for exploitation.
Every synthetic image of abuse has a victim — whether the photographed moment ever occurred is irrelevant to the psychological and reputational harm it causes. Without decisive legal reform, platform accountability and public education, AI-enabled sexual exploitation will escalate at machine speed, outpacing human capacity to detect, prevent or punish it. Survivors will remain trapped in a digital environment where violations are instantaneous, infinitely replicable and nearly impossible to erase. The question is not whether society can act — it is whether we are willing to act before this becomes an uncontainable norm.
Learn how you can join our contributor community.
