France Considers Criminalizing the Purchase of Remote Sexual Services

PARIS — France’s National Assembly is weighing a proposal that would make it a criminal offense to purchase sexual services performed remotely by streamers and custom-content creators, as well as to facilitate those transactions through online platforms.

French law does not currently criminalize prostitution itself, but it penalizes clients of prostitutes and people who financially benefit from prostitution. The Court of Cassation, France’s highest court for civil and criminal matters, has previously determined that online services such as camming do not meet the legal definition of prostitution because they do not involve physical contact with the client.

Bill 3106, a wider measure addressing sexual and gender-based violence against women and children, would expand the definition of prostitution to cover the online purchase of sexual acts. If adopted, the provision would classify platforms facilitating streaming and custom-content transactions as “pimps,” while users who tip streamers or commission custom content could be treated as “johns.”

The proposed change could expose fan and webcam platforms, their users and, potentially, creators who work together to enforcement under the prostitution laws.

The provision follows a similar measure enacted in Sweden last year. At the time, the European Sex Workers’ Rights Alliance and Red Umbrella Sweden stated, “Criminalising the purchase of digital sexual services will not stop exploitation. It will only push workers further into the shadows.”

France Unbowed, the left-wing party that holds 71 of the National Assembly’s 577 seats, has called for the proposed ban to be removed from the legislation.

“It does not protect the people it claims to help,” an amendment submitted by France Unbowed states. “On the contrary, criminalizing intermediaries will inevitably lead to the closure of established, legal platforms with traceable activities on which these individuals currently operate. This closure would not eliminate the activity, but would simply shift it to unregulated, less traceable, and far less protective channels, further exposing those involved to the very risks the article purports to combat.”

The Assembly’s Ecologist and Social caucus has also opposed the provision, arguing that remote content creation and in-person sex work “do not present exactly the same issues of protection, health and recognition.” The caucus also said that criminalizing clients has not eliminated sex work, but instead has pushed sex workers toward greater secrecy.

“Extending such a logic to online activities at present therefore does not seem appropriate, unless the aim is to reproduce the same effects in the digital space,” the caucus’s proposed amendment states.

Bill 3106 was referred to a special committee and remains under review as lawmakers consider its provisions.