‌Context & Objective: Non-consensual deepfake pornography presents a significant challenge to human dignity and digital governance due to its rapid dissemination and the inherent difficulty of attribution and evidence preservation. This research evaluates the efficacy of current legislative frameworks in Iran specifically Articles 14 through 16 of the Computer Crimes Law and the European Union focusing on the Artificial Intelligence Act and the Digital Services Act. The study outlines the transition from theoretical norms to practical deterrence by examining the intersection of legal standards digital evidence and enforcement mechanisms. The primary research question seeks to identify an integrated model of norm evidence and execution that provides an effective response to deepfake pornography in Iran while determining which components of the European Union regulatory framework are suitable for selective adaptation within the Iranian legal context.
 ‌Method & Approach: The study employs a doctrinal research method and a comparative legislative approach based on a comprehensive analysis of library sources legislative texts and selected judicial precedents. The analysis is structured around a three-level framework comprising the normative framework practical guarantees of execution and judicial challenges. This methodology allows for a systematic comparison between the risk-based regulatory environment of the European Union and the criminal justice-oriented approach of Iran specifically evaluating how technical forensic findings are translated into judicial proof within different legal systems.
 ‌Findings: The analysis reveals that the European Union reliance on risk classification and transparency requirements is insufficient without robust standards for proving origin and multi-signatory expert reporting to curb the cycle of redistribution. In the Iranian legal system deterrence is undermined by an over-reliance on customary interpretations of obscenity the absence of a narrow legal definition for deepfakes and a lack of specific operational protocols for online platforms regarding evidence preservation and content removal. Furthermore, the findings indicate that current penalties in both jurisdictions often fail to account for the economic logic of digital networks as fixed fines and short-term imprisonment do not adequately offset the illicit profits generated by systematic distribution.
 ‌Conclusion: The research concludes that an effective legal response requires a legally testable definition of deepfakes based on noticeable resemblance reliable attribution and the lack of valid consent. Recommendations include the establishment of a national standard for expert forensic reports that clarifies decision thresholds and error margins alongside the alignment of criminal penalties with the economic scale of the offense through the restitution of illegitimate interests. Moreover, online platforms must be legally mandated to implement timely removals and search for essentially equivalent versions of harmful content to prevent viral reproduction. By selectively adapting European elements such as platform accountability and risk-based mitigation while harmonizing them with the Iranian legal structure the legal response can be elevated from a declaratory state to an effective protective and deterrent mechanism.