WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SF 5310

Nonconsensual creation, possession, and dissemination prohibition of nudification images

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Bill Lieske

Prohibits creating or disseminating nudification images of identifiable people without consent, with penalties up to 5 years or 10 with aggravating factors.

Referred to Judiciary and Public Safety
#crimesandcriminals #publicsafetyandpublicsafetydepartment
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SF 5310

Summary of SF 5310 (Minnesota) – Nonconsensual creation, possession, and dissemination prohibition of nudification images

This bill adds a new criminal statute targeting the nonconsensual creation, possession, and dissemination of nudification images in Minnesota. It establishes definitions, prohibited conduct, penalties, venue rules, exemptions, and related procedural provisions. The effective date is August 1, 2026, with applicability to crimes committed on or after that date.

Purpose and intent

  • Prohibit the nonconsensual manipulation (nudification) of images to depict identifiable individuals as nude or exposing intimate parts, or engaging in a sexual act, when the original material did not depict them in that state.
  • Create criminal liability for anyone who creates or disseminates such nudification images, with enhanced penalties in specified aggravating circumstances.
  • Provide a framework for penalties, trial venue, exemptions, and immunity for certain service providers.

Key provisions and changes

  • Definitions (Section 1, Subdivision 1)
    • Nudification image: any image, photograph, video, or visual recording produced by nudification that shows an identifiable person nude or exposing intimate parts or engaging in a sexual act, where the source material did not depict the person in that state.
    • Nudification: altering or generating an image/video to depict an intimate part not present in the original, in a way that a reasonable person would believe the intimate part belongs to the identifiable individual.
    • Dissemination: distribution to one or more persons or publication by any publicly available medium.
    • Personal information: includes names, addresses, phone numbers, emails, social media handles, or geolocation data.
    • Intimate parts and sexual act: align with existing Minnesota definitions (sexual act/remains consistent with related statutes).
  • Prohibition and criminal liability (Section 1, Subdivisions 2–3)
    • Offense: Anyone who intentionally creates or disseminates a nudification image, knowing or reasonably should know the depicted individual did not consent, and the person is identifiable from the image or associated personal information, is guilty of a crime.
    • Penalty baseline: felony, up to 5 years’ imprisonment or a fine up to $10,000, or both.
    • Aggravated penalties (up to 10 years or $20,000) if any of the following apply: 1) The depicted individual suffers financial loss from the nudification image. 2) The actor intends to profit from the nudification image. 3) The actor runs an online platform for creating/disseminating nudification images. 4) The nudification image is posted on a website. 5) The act is intended to harass the depicted individual. 6) The source material was obtained via other criminal offenses (e.g., sex crimes). 7) The actor has prior convictions under this section or related sex-offense statutes.
    • Sentencing guidelines: The Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines Commission must assign an appropriate severity level ranking consistent with similar offenses, considering the nonconsensual nature, technological manipulation, and potential for widespread harm.
  • Defenses and exemptions (Subdivisions 4–6)
    • No defense based on the depicted individual’s prior consent to private transmission of the nudification image.
    • Exemptions include use in:
    • Law enforcement or legal proceedings, reporting unlawful conduct, or medical/mental health treatment (where dissemination is protected).
    • Commercial settings where the depicted individual knew or should have known nudification could be created and disseminated.
    • Matters of public interest with clear identification and good-faith actions.
    • Legitimate scientific research or education with clear identification and good-faith effort to minimize dissemination.
    • Legal proceedings consistent with common practice or court order.
  • Venue (Subdivison 5)
    • Prosecution may occur in the county where the offense occurred, the actor’s or depicted individual’s county of residence, or the county where the nudification image was produced, reproduced, found, stored, received, or possessed.
  • Immunity (Subdivision 7)
    • No liability for interactive computer services, public mobile services, private radio services, telecommunications networks, or broadband providers for content supplied by others.
  • Effective date (EFFECTIVE DATE)
    • The act becomes effective August 1, 2026, applying to crimes committed on or after that date.

Who and what would be affected

  • Individuals who create or disseminate nudification images without consent, where the person depicted is identifiable.
  • Online platforms, websites, apps, and service providers involved in hosting or distributing such imagery (with immunity for content supplied by others, per Subd. 7).
  • Victims of nudification who suffer financial or reputational harm, as aggravating factors influence penalties.
  • Law enforcement, prosecutors, and the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines Commission, which receive new enforcement and guideline considerations.
  • Entities and persons involved in legitimate research, education, or public-interest reporting, due to specified exemptions.

Procedural and timeline considerations

  • Effective date: August 1, 2026.
  • Applicability: crimes committed on or after the effective date.
  • Prosecution can be in multiple counties depending on where acts occurred or where material resides.
  • The Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines Commission must promptly assign a severity level to offenses under this statute, aligned with comparable nonconsensual image-distribution offenses and recognizing unique harms from nudification.

If you’d like, I can provide a shorter one-page brief or a side-by-side comparison with related Minnesota statutes on nonconsensual dissemination of private sexual images.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.