Can an adult share inappropriate photos of themselves as a child?

Question

I'm curious if it's legal to have inappropriate pictures of another child, even if that child is an adult now and consents.

If that's illegal, then how about images of yourself naked? At first, it might seem silly to ask that, but in both cases (a. the pictures are of yourself; b. the pictures are of someone else) the owner of the images consented to the person having them.

The way I see it, consent is the reason anti child porn laws exist (after all, children lack the maturity to give consent). So, it seems to me that both cases should be legal, because you have valid consent for the pictures, given that all the people involved are adults now.

(Disclaimer: this is a hypothetical question, obviously. I just thought it had interesting legal/moral dilemmas.)

Answer 1

The age of the depicted does not change.

The definition if some material is child or youth pornographic material, determined by the age of the person in the material at the time it was made, as well as whether the material is pornographic or inappropriate/obscene in the first place. Consent is irrelevant. If the material depicts people below 18 in inappropriate situations, then it is such material, notwithstanding the age or consent of the person now. Possession and distribution follow the normal laws for such material.

germany

ANY material depicting a person below 14 in such situations is wholly illegal. Nobody may have it. Nobody. § 184b StGB is very clear in that.

Material of people between 14 and 18 is youth pornographic; slightly different rules apply under § 184c StGB. Publishing is banned, but consent can allow possession. Note that consent can be withdrawn.

See also this and this Answer.

Answer 2

Photos of naked children are not illegal

Let’s take as an example, the definition of illegal child abuse material from the new-south-wales Crimes Act 1900 s91FB

child abuse material means material that depicts or describes, in a way that reasonable persons would regard as being, in all the circumstances, offensive—

…

(d) the private parts of a person who is, appears to be or is implied to be, a child.

(2) The matters to be taken into account in deciding whether reasonable persons would regard particular material as being, in all the circumstances, offensive, include—

(a) the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults, and

…

(d) the general character of the material (including whether it is of a medical, legal or scientific character).

Regular photos of naked children that are not sexualized or otherwise “offensive” to “reasonable persons” are not illegal child abuse material and can be distributed to whoever you like.

If you are actually talking about child abuse material …

Possession and dissemination is a crime even if you are the child in the material.

Answer 3

canada

The sharer would have a defence if the image is shared only with any other lawful consenting participants depicted in or having made the image.

Definition of child pornography

I will assume based on your tags that "inappropriate photos" means "child pornography." Mere nudity is not child pornography.

In Canada, child pornography is defined at s. 163.1 of the Criminal Code. In visual form, child pornography is:

a photographic, film, video or other visual representation, whether or not it was made by electronic or mechanical means,

(i) that shows a person who is or is depicted as being under the age of eighteen years and is engaged in or is depicted as engaged in explicit sexual activity, or

(ii) the dominant characteristic of which is the depiction, for a sexual purpose, of a sexual organ or the anal region of a person under the age of eighteen years.

Offence of distributing child pornography

It is an offence to share child pornography (s. 163.1(3)):

Every person who transmits, makes available, distributes, sells, advertises, imports, exports or possesses for the purpose of transmission, making available, distribution, sale, advertising or exportation any child pornography is guilty of an indictable offence ...

The private-use of consensual recordings of lawful sexual activity

The Supreme Court of Canada has read-in an exception for private use, where the activity recorded is lawful, and all the participants consent to the recording (R. v. Sharpe, 2001 SCC 2):

[A private-recordings exception] protect[s] the recording of lawful sexual activity, provided certain conditions were met. The person possessing the recording must have personally recorded or participated in the sexual activity in question. That activity must not be unlawful, thus ensuring the consent of all parties, and precluding the exploitation or abuse of children. All parties must also have consented to the creation of the record. The recording must be kept in strict privacy by the person in possession, and intended exclusively for private use by the creator and the persons depicted therein. Thus, for example, a teenage couple would not fall within the law’s purview for creating and keeping sexually explicit pictures featuring each other alone, or together engaged in lawful sexual activity, provided these pictures were created together and shared only with one another.