Journal of Islamic Law Research

Journal of Islamic Law Research

Criminalizing Deepfake Pornography: A Comparative Legislative Analysis of Iranian and European Union Law

Type : Research Article

Authors
Zahrasadat Mirhashemi 1
Fatemeh Najib Zadeh Vamegh Abadi 2
1 Associate Professor, Department of Islamic Jurisprudence and Fundamentals of Islamic Law, Faculty of Theology, AlZahra University, Tehran, Iran.
2 PhD Student in Jurisprudence and Fundamentals of Islamic Law, Faculty of Theology and Islamic Studies, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.
10.30497/law.2026.248521.3808
Abstract
 ‌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.
Keywords
Pornography
Deepfake
Artificial Intelligence
Privacy
Human Dignity
Subjects
  1. Aghaei, M., & Han, J. (2023). Combating deepfake technologies: Legal and ethical challenges in Europe and beyond. Springer.
  2. Akbari, Abbasali, Aqapour, Ali, & Aqapour, Kamal (1401 SH/2022). Taḥlīl-e Padīdeh-ye Mojramāneh-ye Dīpfeykhā-ye (Jaʿlhā-ye Rāyāneh-ī) Pīčīdeh bā Negāhī beh Sīyāsat-e Keyfarī-ye Īrān va Čāleshhā-ye Ḥoqūq-e Bašarī [Analysis of the Criminal Phenomenon of Complex Deepfakes (Computer Forgeries) with a Look at Iran's Criminal Policy and Human Rights Challenges]. Nashriyeh-ye Agah [Agah Journal], Vol. 16, No. 59, pp. 149–169 [in Persian].
  3. AlgorithmWatch. (2025). A guide to the AI Act — Why gaps remain for fundamental rights.
  4. AP News. (2024, March 14). EU asks major platforms how they are reducing generative-AI risks (including deepfakes) under the DSA.
  5. Associated Press. (2024, May 30). Operation Endgame takes down ransomware networks across Europe. Associated Press News.
  6. Azizi, Amir Mehdi (1402 SH/2023). Ḥoqūq-e Keyfarī-ye Jarāʾim-e Rāyāneh-ī [Criminal Law of Cybercrimes]. Tehran: Majd [in Persian].
  7. Babaei, Javad (1397 SH/2018). Jarāʾim-e Rāyāneh-ī va Āyīn-e Dādrasī-ye Ḥākem bar Ān [Cybercrimes and the Governing Criminal Procedure]. Tehran: Judiciary Press and Publication Center [in Persian].
  8. Becker, M. (2024). Generative KI und Deepfakes in der KI-VO — Für eine Positivkennzeichnung authentischer Inhalte. Computer und Recht, 40(6), 353–366.
  9. Birrer, A., & Just, N. (2024). What we know and don’t know about deepfakes: An investigation into the state of the research and regulatory landscape. New Media & Society, 00(0), 12.
  10. Block, M. J. (2024). A critical evaluation of deepfake regulation through the AI Act in the European Union. Journal of European Consumer and Market Law, 13(4), 184–192.
  11. C2PA (Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity). (2025). Content credentials explainer (Version 2.2), 4–5, 11–12.
  12. Chesney, R., & Citron, D. (2019). Deep fakes: A looming challenge for privacy, democracy, and national security. California Law Review, 107(6), 1762–1768.
  13. Citron, D. K., & Franks, M. A. (2014). Criminalizing revenge porn. Wake Forest Law Review, 49, 345–391.
  14. Cole, S. (2019, June 26). This horrifying app undresses a photo of any woman with a single click. Motherboard (VICE).
  15. Council of Europe. (2018, March 7). Recommendation CM/Rec(2018)2 of the Committee of Ministers to Member States on the roles and responsibilities of internet intermediaries.
  16. Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). (2019). Eva Glawischnig-Piesczek v Facebook Ireland Limited, Case C-18/18, Judgment of 3 October 2019, ECLI:EU:C:2019:821 (paras. 45–50).
  17. Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). (2019). Glawischnig-Piesczek v Facebook Ireland Limited, C-18/18 (paras. 45–49).
  18. Court of Justice of the European Union. (2019). Judgment of 3 October 2019, Eva Glawischnig-Piesczek v Facebook Ireland Limited (C-18/18), ECLI:EU:C:2019:821 (paras. 45–49).
  19. Cyber Police of Iran (FATA) (1400 SH/2021). Rāhnamā-ye Ḥemāyatī va Gozārešhā-ye Ejrā-ī Peyrāmūn-e Entešār-e Taṣāvīr-e Ḵoṣūṣī [Support Guide and Executive Reports Regarding the Publication of Private Images] [in Persian].
  20. Cyber Police of Iran (FATA) (1403 SH/2024). Gozāreš-e Ṭarḥ-e Moqābeleh bā Jarāʾim-e Ġeyr-e Aḵlāqī dar Sakūhā-ye Barḵaṭ (Āmār-e Raṣad va Sahm-e Sakūhā) [Report on the Project to Combat Immoral Crimes on Online Platforms (Monitoring Statistics and Platform Share)] [in Persian].
  21. ENISA — European Union Agency for Cybersecurity. (2025). ENISA threat landscape 2025 (pp. 3–4).
  22. Eurojust, & Europol. (2025). Common challenges in cybercrime — 2024 review, 6–7, 17–18.
  23. European Commission — European AI Office. (2024). The European AI Office: Mandate and tasks.
  24. European Commission. (2020). EU strategy on victims’ rights (2020–2025).
  25. European Commission. (2022). European artificial intelligence strategy: Fostering research and investment through Horizon Europe and Digital Europe Programme.
  26. European Commission. (2024). Guidelines for providers of VLOPs and VLOSEs on the mitigation of systemic risks for electoral processes (OJ C 218/1, 14.6.2024, pp. 8, 10).
  27. European Commission. (2024, March 25). Guidelines under the DSA to safeguard election integrity (including labelling of AI-generated content such as deepfakes).
  28. European Parliament Research Service. (2021). Tackling deepfakes in European policy.
  29. European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS). (2025). Children and deepfakes. European Parliament.
  30. European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA). (2025). AI threat landscape 2025: Standards and recommendations for trustworthy AI, 15, 43, 49.
  31. European Union. (2022). Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 on a Single Market for Digital Services (Digital Services Act), OJ L 277, Arts. 51–52, 79–82.
  32. European Union. (2023). Regulation (EU) 2023/1543 on European Production and Preservation Orders for electronic evidence.
  33. European Union. (2024). Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (Artificial Intelligence Act), OJ L 2024/1689, Art. 50, 82; Art. 99, 115.
  34. Europol, & Eurojust. (2024). SIRIUS EU electronic evidence situation report 2024, 8–12, 53–61, 65–67.
  35. Europol, Eurojust, European Judicial Network (EJN). (2024). SIRIUS EU electronic evidence situation report 2024, p. 57.
  36. Europol. (2024). Facing reality? Law enforcement and the challenge of deepfakes (Updated ed.). Publications Office of the European Union.
  37. Feinberg, J. (1984). Harm to others: The moral limits of the criminal law (Vol. 1). Oxford University Press.
  38. Francati, D., Goonatilake, Y. N., Pawar, S., Venturi, D., & Ateniese, G. (2025). The coding limits of robust watermarking for generative models, 1–2.
  39. Franqueira, V., Altuncu, E., & Li, S. (2024a). Deepfake: Definitions, performance metrics, and standards, datasets and benchmarks, and a meta-review. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 70, 1–30.
  40. Franqueira, V., Ribeiro, R., Silva, J. P., & Almeida, J. (2024b). Preventing and detecting deepfake videos: Challenges and solutions. International Journal of Digital Law, 29(2), 32–35.
  41. Garrido, A., Marzal, P., & Alvarado, E. (2024a). The spread of fake news and deepfake content on social media platforms. Journal of Media Studies, 15(4), 76–78.
  42. Garrido, M., Albuja, S., & Stojanovic, J. (2024b). The rise of deepfake: Implications for digital content and the law. Cambridge University Press.
  43. Ghannad, Fatemeh (1390 SH/2011). Jaʿl dar Bastar-e Fanāvarīhā-ye Eṭṭelāʿāt va Ertebāṭāt [Forgery in the Context of Information and Communication Technologies]. Amoozeh-hay-e Hoquq-e Keyfari [Criminal Law Doctrines], Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 63–83 [in Persian].
  44. Ghial, R., Pundir, D., & Kaur, R. (2024). Right to be forgotten: A human rights-based approach for governance in generative AI. In T. Senjyu, C. So-In, & A. Joshi (Eds.), Smart trends in computing and communications: Proceedings of SmartCom 2024 (Vol. 5, Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, Vol. 949, pp. 23–34). Springer Nature Singapore.
  45. Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP. (2023, August 1). EU strengthens cross-border access to e-evidence in criminal proceedings (application as of 18 Aug 2026).
  46. Glawischnig-Piesczek v. Facebook Ireland Ltd (C-18/18) [2019] ECLI:EU:C:2019:821.
  47. Google Spain SL v Agencia Española de Protección de Datos (AEPD) and Mario Costeja González (C-131/12) [2014] ECLI:EU:C:2014:317.
  48. Gosse, C., & Burkell, J. (2020). Politics and porn: How news media characterizes problems presented by deepfakes. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 37(5), 497–511.
  49. Han, C., Li, A., Kumar, D., & Durumeric, Z. (2025). Characterizing the MrDeepFakes sexual deepfake marketplace. In Proceedings of the 34th USENIX Security Symposium (pp. 9–12).
  50. Han, Y., Kwon, J., & Lee, H. (2024). MrDeepFakes and the illegal distribution of deepfake pornography: A systematic review. International Journal of Digital Law, 29(2), 71–88.
  51. Hayes, S. C., & Paul, P. (2007). The pornography "addiction" model: Evidence for false claims. Science and Engineering Ethics, 13(4), 515–533.
  52. INTERPOL. (2024). Beyond illusions: Synthetic media and implications for law enforcement (INTERPOL Digital Forensics Series, Vol. 6, pp. 14–15, 26).
  53. Jacobi, S. (2023, September 6). AI and deepfakes: EU and Italian regulations. Jacobacci Law Firm.
  54. Kastrenakes, J. (2019, June 27). Controversial deepfake app DeepNude shuts down hours after being exposed. The Verge.
  55. Kim, D., Lee, T., & Park, Y. (2025). The role of AI platforms in tackling deepfakes: Challenges and innovations. Technology and Law Journal, 12(1), 3–6.
  56. Korshunov, P., & Marcel, S. (2023). Deepfakes: Detection, challenges, and responses. Springer.
  57. Krook, J., Winter, P., Downer, J., & Blockx, J. (2024). A systematic literature review of AI transparency laws in the EU and UK: A socio-legal approach to AI transparency governance. SSRN Preprint, 3.
  58. Labuz, M. (2024). Deep fakes and the Artificial Intelligence Act — An important signal or a missed opportunity? Policy & Internet, 783–800.
  59. Leins, K., Williams, B., & Murray, G. (2023). AI and responsibility gaps in combatting deepfakes.
  60. Löfgren-Mårtenson, L. (2008). Adolescents’ perceptions of pornography. Journal of Sex Research, 45(3), 306–312.
  61. Mania, K. (2022). Legal protection of revenge and deepfake porn victims in the European Union: Findings from a comparative legal study. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 25(1), 117–129.
  62. Masood, A., Hafeez, I., & Khan, S. (2024). Ethical implications of AI in media: Deepfake detection and prevention. Journal of AI Ethics, 5(2), 13–15.
  63. Masood, M., Nawaz, M., Malik, K. M., Javed, A., & Irtaza, A. (2021). Deepfakes generation and detection: State-of-the-art, open challenges, countermeasures, and way forward. Journal of Visual Communication and Image Representation, 77, 103–118.
  64. McGlynn, C., & Toparlak, O. (2025). Digital voyeurism and the implications of deepfake pornography. ResearchGate.
  65. Mohammadi Fardoei, Ataollah (1397 SH/2018). Barresī-ye Jazā-ī-ye ʿAnāṣer-e Bezeh-ye Jaʿl-e Rāyāneh-ī dar Ḥoqūq-e Īrān [Criminal Investigation of the Elements of the Crime of Computer Forgery in Iranian Law]. Nashriyeh-ye Ghanounyar [Ghanounyar Journal], Vol. 2, No. 8, pp. 459–476 [in Persian].
  66. Moreno, F. R. (2024). Generative AI and deepfakes: A human rights approach to tackling harmful content. International Review of Law, Computers & Technology, 38(3), 297–326.
  67. Mousavi, Ali (1394 SH/2015). Māhīyat va Maṣādīq-e Moḥtavā-ye Mostahjan dar Qavānīn-e Īrān [Nature and Instances of Obscene Content in Iranian Laws]. Faslnameh-ye Hoquq va Siyasat [Law and Politics Quarterly], Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 45–68 [in Persian].
  68. National Cyberspace Center of Iran (1403 SH/2024). Eṭṭelāʿ-resānī Darbāreh-ye Mowjhā-ye Moḥtavā-ye Moḵerreb va Żarūrat-e Eqdām-e Hamāhang [Information Regarding Waves of Harmful Content and the Necessity of Coordinated Action] [in Persian].
  69. Nouri, Sayyid Masoud (1386 SH/2007). Porotokol-e Elḥāqī beh Peymānnāmeh-ye Ḥoqūq-e Kūdak "Darbāreh-ye Forūš, Faḥšā va Harzeh-negārī-ye Kūdakān" va Barresī-ye Elḥāq-e Īrān beh Ān [Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography and the Analysis of Iran's Accession to It]. Do-faslnameh-ye Hoquq-e Bashar [Human Rights Biannual Journal], Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 39–56 [in Persian].
  70. People of the State of California, acting by and through San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu v. Sol Ecom, Inc., et al. (2024). Complaint for injunctive relief and civil penalties for violations of Business and Professions Code § 17200 (Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Francisco).
  71. Rezaei, Mehdi (1396 SH/2017). Barresī-ye Toṭbīqī-ye Jarāʾim-e Mostahjan dar Ḥoqūq-e Jazā-ye Īrān va Etteḥādīyeh-ye Owrūpā [Comparative Study of Obscene Crimes in Criminal Law of Iran and the European Union]. Pazhoheshhay-e Hoquqi [Legal Research Journal], Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 101–120 [in Persian].
  72. Rigon, B., & Baratto, G. (2024). La deepfake pornography tra criminologia e diritto. Quaderni della Facoltà di Giurisprudenza, 86, 459–484.
  73. Rozman, Ali (1395 SH/2016). Barresī-ye Keyfarī-ye Jarāʾim-e Jensī va Monāfī-ye ʿEffat bā Negāhī bar Fażā-ye Sāyber [Criminal Investigation of Sexual Crimes and Offenses Against Public Decency with a Focus on Cyberspace]. Tehran: Ghanounyar [in Persian].
  74. San Francisco City Attorney’s Office. (2024, August 15). City Attorney sues most-visited websites that create nonconsensual deepfake pornography (Press release).
  75. Schuett, J. (2023). Risk management in the Artificial Intelligence Act. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 15(2), 367–385.
  76. Shi, H., Shi, X., Doğan, S. M. Y., Alzubi, S. M., Huang, T., & Zhang, Y. (2025). Benchmarking audio deepfake detection robustness in real-world communication scenarios. Proceedings of EUSIPCO 2025, 339–347.
  77. Shiri, Abbas (1401 SH/2022). Dīpfeykh yā Hamānandsāzī-ye Ṣowtī yā Taṣvīrī-ye Ġeyr-e Vāqeʿī dar Ḥoqūq-e Keyfarī [Deepfake or Unreal Audio or Visual Replication in Criminal Law]. Faslnameh-ye Tahqiqat-e Hoquqi (Vizhehnameh-ye Hoquq va Fanavari) [Legal Research Quarterly (Special Issue on Law and Technology)], Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 143–168 [in Persian].
  78. Tabrizi, Sadeq (1403 SH/2024). Āyīn-e Dādrasī-ye Pīšrafteh-ye Jarāʾim-e Sāyberī [Advanced Cybercrime Procedure]. Tehran: Mizan [in Persian].
  79. Tortorelli, M. (2024). Image-based sexual abuse: Application limits and perspectives for reform of Article 612-ter of the Italian Criminal Code. Diritto Penale Contemporaneo: Rivista Trimestrale, 1(1), 207–240.
  80. Truong, K. C. D. (2024). Reputation (not Taylor’s version): Regulating AI-hallucinated deepfakes of public figures. University of Illinois Journal of Law, Technology & Policy, 449.
  81. Umbach, L., Smith, K., & Hudson, D. (2024). Non-consensual synthetic intimate imagery: A growing threat to digital privacy. Journal of Digital Ethics, 12(1), 89–101.
  82. Verdoliva, L. (2020). Media forensics and deepfakes: An overview. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing, 14(5), 910–932.
  83. Wang, X., Zhou, S., & Zhang, Y. (2025). Detecting and mitigating deepfakes: A review of AI-based systems and challenges. Proceedings of the 2025 International Conference on AI and Media, 49.
  84. Zhou, Z., Zhang, L., & Chen, J. (2025). Deepfake detection techniques and their limitations: A systematic review. Journal of Digital Forensics, 33(1), 55–57.

  • Received 08 July 2025
  • Accepted 24 October 2025