Making deepfake porn without consent could soon be a crime in England
Making deepfake porn without consent could soon be a crime in England
www.cnn.com
Making deepfake porn without consent could soon be a crime in England | CNN Business
20 comments
-
-
I have a hard time accepting this as a crime. What if the illustration hand-drawn, or clothed but still sexual in character? Is caricature illegal, by this standard?
-
"Without consent." I'm very curious who would consent to having deepfake porn made of themselves.
-
I can imagine a non-zero amount of people would consent to a deep-fake porn video of themselves having sex with some generic hot woman, just as one example.
-
That makes sense, I hadn't thought of that sort of deepfake.
-
-
A user shared a story a while back about his wife and her sister giving photos and agreeing to it. Lots of kinky people out there.
-
-
This is why we should be making laws around likeness rights. If you damage somebody by he publicly using their name to spread falsehoods, that's defamation or libel. But, if you produce an image or video of their likeness instead of using their name, there's no legal recourse. Makes no sense this day in age
-
Who decides how similar somebody is "allowed" to look to another? There are people who bear an uncanny resemblance to others. And what of identical twins? Can one sue the other if they do porn?
-
-
seems like the only way to deal with it.. make it equivalent to sexual assault..
-
I wonder what happens when it just accidentally looks like someone but was intended to be a fictional person. Also, how much can you base it on a real person before it's considered a deep fake of that person? Would race-swapping be enough to make it a "new" person so it's not illegal anymore? My intuition is that just eye colour or something wouldn't be enough, but it's a sliding scale where the line must be drawn somewhere even if it's a fuzzy line.
What about an AI generated mashup of two people like those "what the child would look like" pictures back in the day. Does that violate both people or neither?
What about depicting a person older than they are now? That's technically not somebody that exists, but might in the future.
What if you use AI but make it look like it's hand-drawn or a cartoon?
What if you use AI to create sexual voice clips of a real person but use images that don't look like them or no image at all?
There are just so many possibilities and questions that I feel it might be impossible to legislate in a way that isn't always 10 steps behind or has a million unforeseen consequences.
-
Government grasping at straws. More news at 8.
20 comments
If they're going to go this way, I don't think it should be limited to just porn. There are plenty of ways you could ruin someone's life without a deepfake being sexually explicit.