>>938804300
>Child pornography laws are obtuse, but to qualify at least it needs either depictions of real or simulated sexual acts or genitalia
I don't think the definitions are obtuse, actually. IIRC the US law specifies that it is "indistinguishable from a real person" or that a real person was used in its creation to qualify as CP. Obviously, anime lolis are easily distinguished as cartoons and not real persons, so unless it was specifically modeled on a real existent child it wouldn't be actionable. The latter scenario is also rarely the case, unless you're a retarded edgelord like Shad who would draw porn of someone's kid as a joke.
Now, I do think AI image/video generation is hitting the level where it can generate photorealistic images that are harder to distinguish from the real thing, which means it probably would qualify as CP, so that's gonna be a big deal in the near future, but that's also a different topic.