Even that is not necessary in some jurisdictions. In the UK, for example, various depictions of "children" (with a clause specifying the inclusion of those characters which are people but with one or more additions) are illegal even if based on an imaginary child. When judging a case under a similar law in Sweden which lacked an "additions" clause, a neko with big eyes and a tail was deemed not a person. It's unclear whether the UK law applies to furry characters.
Even that is not necessary in some jurisdictions. In the UK, for example, various depictions of "children" (with a clause specifying the inclusion of those characters which are people but with one or more additions) are illegal even if based on an imaginary child. When judging a case under a similar law in Sweden which lacked an "additions" clause, a neko with big eyes and a tail was deemed not a person. It's unclear whether the UK law applies to furry characters.