Publishing a real intimate depiction of a minor is made unlawful
What the document says“it shall be unlawful for any person, in interstate or foreign commerce, to use an interactive computer service to knowingly publish an intimate visual depiction of an identifiable individual who is a minor with intent to-- ``(i) abuse, humiliate, harass, or degrade the minor; or ``(ii) arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.”
The second offense. Using an interactive computer service in interstate or foreign commerce to knowingly publish an intimate visual depiction of an identifiable minor is unlawful where it is done with intent to abuse, humiliate, harass or degrade the minor, or to arouse or gratify anyone's sexual desire. The privacy, public exposure, public concern and harm conditions attached to the adult offense are not repeated here. The exceptions in subparagraph (C) apply.
What the document actually says“it shall be unlawful for any person, in interstate or foreign commerce, to use an interactive computer service to knowingly publish an intimate visual depiction of an identifiable individual who is a minor with intent to-- ``(i) abuse, humiliate, harass, or degrade the minor; or ``(ii) arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.”
You cannot post a private nude image of a child online. Not to shame them. Not for sexual thrill.
This rule is shorter than the one for adults. It asks only what the poster meant to do.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.