※ 引述《w40w40w40w40 ()》之銘言：
: 就現在版上吵得沸沸揚揚的聯合國防範二次元兒童色情草案啦
: 假如真的通過並且實施
: 現下有哪些作品有可能會被禁呢?
: 我覺得物語系列極危險啦
假如草案通過...
那不是當然應該先來看草案講啥嗎？
https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?
symbolno=INT/CRC/INF/8870&Lang=en
61. Child pornography is defined in article 2 OPSC as
“any representation of a child engaged in real or simulated explicit
sexual activities, regardless of the means used, or any representation of
the sexual parts of a child for primarily sexual purposes”
這段是OPSC( https://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/OPSCCRC.aspx )
裡對兒色的定義
62. The Committee urges States parties to prohibit, by law, child sexual abuse
material in any form. The Committee notes that such material is
increasingly circulating online, and strongly recommends States parties to
ensure that relevant provisions of their Criminal Codes cover all forms of
material, including when the acts listed in article 3.1(c) are committed
online and including when such material represents realistic
representations of non-existing children.
OPSC article 3.1(c)的定義是
(c) Producing, distributing, disseminating, importing, exporting, offering,
selling or possessing for the above purposes child pornography as defined
in article 2.
草案強烈建議各國建立刑法條款針對
製造分發散播進口出口提供銷售以及持有相關兒色物件者
即使那些物件是擬真表現的非現實存在的孩童也算
(以上渣翻,有更好翻譯的人請賜教)
63. The Committee is of the view that “simulated explicit sexual activities”
should be interpreted as including any material, online or offline, that
depicts or otherwise represents any person appearing to be a child engaged
in real or simulated sexually explicit conduct and realistic and/or virtual
depictions of a child engaged in sexually explicit conduct.
Such depictions contribute to normalising the sexualisation of children
and fuels the demand of child sexual abuse material.
64. Moreover, for the reasons explained in paragraph 63, any representation of
the sexual parts of a child, including realistic images of the sexual
organs of a child, for primarily sexual purposes falls under the
definition of this offence.
Where it may be complicated to establish with certainty if a
representation is intended or used for “primarily sexual purposes”,
the Committee deems it necessary to consider the context in which it is
being used.
所以也是有但書的，有些東西算不算兒色要看狀況，看是不是主要用在性的目的上
當然文字是死的，解釋權是活的就是了

寄幼女戰記過去他們會不會起邱

可以寄信 hmmmmmmmmmm

寄5樓自拍 聯合國瓦解

全部都來台灣搞兒童色情算了，反正沒入聯

台灣現在情況還算可以(無海苔之類的) 不過很可能被搞==

要用兒童色情才不會找台灣找死台灣已經有和外國單位合作抄兒童色情網站的記錄了

不過原po也有提解釋權 就看日本方反應

幼女戰記有任何色情成分嗎

就得罪超多族群的作品+主角是幼女阿XD這些對聯合國來說太刺激惹

台灣只是沒嚴格管而已 硬要抄我想也不是不行

美國要炒誰 台灣配合度100%

台灣法早立好了 祇是沒有大規模抓而已因為兩黨都不想得罪年輕人