Britain criminalises creation of AI-generated fake nude images – in Finland only distribution is illegal

More countries are tightening laws to combat AI-generated fake nude images, but Finland’s current legislation only prohibits their distribution, not their creation, Yle reports.

The UK recently criminalised both the creation and sharing of sexually explicit deepfakes, classifying the issue as a “national emergency.” Meanwhile, Finland’s penal code only outlaws the distribution of such material, though lawmakers are now pushing for stricter regulations.

In March, Social Democrat MP Pinja Perholehto proposed a bill to criminalise the creation of sexual deepfakes without consent. Green League chair Sofia Virta, herself a target of such content according to Yle’s investigation, submitted a similar parliamentary motion. The Nytkis network of women’s organisations within political parties has also demanded an explicit ban on AI-generated fake pornography, arguing that Finland’s laws are outdated.

Globally, deepfake scandals have prompted legal reforms. In Germany, protests erupted in March after actress Collien Fernandes revealed her ex-husband had created AI porn of her. Similar cases have led to new laws in South Korea, Spain, and the US.

Yle highlights three potential legislative models to address the issue:

1. The UK model: criminalising creation, not just distribution

The UK government has taken a firm stance against digital sexual violence, with Prime Minister Keir Starmer calling it a “national crisis.” Since February, creating or requesting sexual deepfakes has been illegal.

Perholehto’s proposal aligns with the UK approach, arguing that manufacturing such content without consent should be a crime regardless of distribution. “I can’t think of a single valid reason why someone should be allowed to create sexual content of others without permission,” she told Yle. “The fact that AI is used doesn’t make it any less harmful to victims.”

However, Sakari Melander, a criminal law professor at the University of Helsinki, questions the enforceability of such a law, noting that creation cases would rarely come to police attention.

2. The Danish model: copyright over one’s own likeness and voice

Denmark’s outgoing government proposed a novel copyright law that would extend protections to an individual’s appearance and voice, preventing unauthorised digital replication. The bill, which gained cross-party support, stalled after snap elections were called in February. Its future remains uncertain.

Unlike Finland’s current approach, the Danish model would cover all deepfakes, not just sexually explicit ones, requiring consent for any digital likeness reproduction.

3. The EU model: banning deepfake apps

The European Union is considering a ban on applications designed specifically to generate sexual deepfakes. The proposal targets platforms facilitating the creation of non-consensual explicit content, aiming to curb the spread of such tools.

In Finland, calls for reform follow Yle’s March report revealing that 75 public figures—primarily women—had been targeted by sexual deepfakes. While the first conviction for distributing such material was handed down earlier this year, advocates argue the law fails to address the root of the problem: the act of creation itself.