Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The use of images of persons in a pornographic context (without the prior consent of the person concerned) on the internet is an increasingly widespread infringement. Unlawful activities carried out with the use of generated images and artificial intelligence are a variant of this phenomenon. "Revenge porn" and "deepfake porn" illustrate the inadequacy of legal systems vis a vis the fast-changing reality. Using the comparative law method, a comparison was made between the current laws of nine EU Member States to create a map of protection for victims of revenge porn. As the results showed, in three of the studied countries there is a separate incrimination of revenge porn; however, the conceptual scope of its definition is significantly different and it is these differences that determine the legal way for the victims to assert their rights. This article is a comparison of the current legal regulations of selected European Union countries and the means of legal protection used by the victims. The text presents the differences occurring in the legal systems adopted in the countries subject to analysis, as well as an assessment of possible solutions at the legal and technological level to face the existing problem.
Karolina Mania (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: