However, it’s unclear if that argument will hold up, since the students who made the images admitted to 59 counts of sexual abuse of a child, and the court will surely consider that. As punishment, the boys were ordered to “serve probation and perform 60 hours of community service each,” Lancaster Online reported. In their complaint, victims argued that “the tip described conduct constituting child sexual abuse” under state and federal laws—“specifically, the production and/or possession of child sexual abuse material involving minor students.”

School accused of aiding spread of AI nudes

LCDS’s attorney told Ars that only the students are criminally liable for the images and that the court should agree to leave the school out of the fight since the only alleged connection is that the boys were their students.

“What Student Plaintiffs do not allege, at any point in the Complaint, is that the images were shared in school, during school hours, or using school equipment or a school Internet connection,” LCDS’s filing said. “The sole nexus to LCDS in the Complaint is that the Student Plaintiffs and the harassers were all students of the school, but that is not enough to survive a motion to dismiss.”

Although gaps in the law may help the school escape the AI nudes scandal, its motion to dismiss did suggest that the court may not grant every demand in their filing. On aiding and abetting claims, the motion to dismiss noted that case-law is “split,” which means an unfriendly judge could side with students and leave the school on the hook for at least some liability for negligence.

However, if the judge doesn’t lean their way, LCDS argued that victims still can’t argue that the school knew the images existed or intentionally helped facilitate their spread, which the school thinks should be fatal.

For victims, the school’s response coolly denying it could have intervened sooner is likely unsurprising but still jarring. Their complaint alleged that after it became clear that the AI nudes described in the tip were real, the school failed to “provide adequate support, counseling, and resources to the victims following the abuse,” allegedly negligently inflicting emotional distress at the time when girls felt most vulnerable walking the halls.