zlacker

> “child sexual abuse material” is preferred, as it better reflects the abuse that is depicted in the images and videos and the resulting trauma to the child.

Yes, CSAM is preferred for material depicting abuse reflecting resulting trauma.

But not for child porn such as manga of fictional children depicting no abuse and traumatising no child.

> Child porn is csam.

"CSAM isn’t pornography—it’s evidence of criminal exploitation of kids."

That's from RAINN, the US's largest anti-sexual violence organisation.

>>chrisj+(OP)
Dude, I litterally provided terminology notice from the DOJ. At this point I don't really know what else will convince you.

>>pyrale+aF
> I litterally provided terminology notice from the DOJ

You provided a terminology preference notice from the (non-lawmaking) DOJ containing a suggestion which the (lawmaking) Congress did not take up.

Thanks for that.

And if/when the French in question decide to take it up, I am sure we'll hear the news! :)

>>chrisj+(OP)
> That's from RAINN, the US's largest anti-sexual violence organisation.

For everyone to make up their own opinion about this poster's honesty, here's where his quote is from [1]. Chosen quotes:

> CSAM includes both real and synthetic content, such as images created with artificial intelligence tools.

> It doesn’t matter if the child agreed to it. It doesn’t matter if they sent the image themselves. If a minor is involved, it’s CSAM—and it’s illegal.

[1]: https://rainn.org/get-the-facts-about-csam-child-sexual-abus...

>>pyrale+qo1
I agree with that. I'd hope everyone would.