Ben Tasker on Nostr: > even if they have no intention to share it but "purely want to cause alarm, ...

> even if they have no intention to share it but "purely want to cause alarm, humiliation, or distress to the victim",

I suspect that won't be the wording in the bill, but as written it seems to suggest there may be a defence of "it was created for sexual stimulation, not to cause distress".

Presumably that means they'd need to show someone telling people (the victim?) they made it or similar?

Seems odd to leave a loophole like that, but maybe I'm reading too much into too little