• @warmaster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    27
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    UK: Making porn of unwilling celebrities is illegal.

    US: Making commercial movies with unwilling actors is perfectly fine!

    • @moon@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      62 months ago

      Not saying actors going unpaid is okay, but one of these things is a sex crime and should absolutely be illegal

  • @yggstyle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    252 months ago

    Step one… create consent deepfake…

    I don’t like that I thought it… But It pains me to say it will be used as a defense at some point.

    • @usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      152 months ago

      Oh wow… You could use a consent deep fake to trick another person to create the sex one. This gets messy quick…

    • @abhibeckert@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      8
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      You’re not the first to think of it and it’s where this whole idea will fall flat on it’s face.

      There’s just no way to actually check if the subject of a photo consented to having their photo taken. That was difficult enough with physical cameras, it’s so much more difficult now that no camera is involved in generating the image.

      I mean, if I were to post an image here in this comment - how can the Fediverse possibly verify that I have the right to post it?

    • @Entropywins@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      42 months ago

      I just imagine someone showing up to my work and presenting that contract and next thing you know I’m stuck in the dryer with only my stepson Esteban to help me…

  • @UnpluggedFridge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    132 months ago

    This is a difficult issue to deal with, but I think the problem lies with our current acceptance of photographs as an objective truth. If a talented writer places someone in an erotic text, we immediately know that this is a product of imagination. If a talented artist sketches up a nude of someone, we can immediately recognize that this is a product of imagination. We have laws around commercial use of likenesses, but I don’t think we would make those things illegal.

    But now we have photographs that are products of imagination. I don’t have a solution for this specific issue, but we all need to calibrate how we establish trust with persons and information now that photographs, video, speech, etc can be faked by AI. I can even imagine a scenario in the not-too-distant future where face-to-face conversation cannot be immediately trusted due to advances in robotics or other technologies.

    Lying and deception are human nature, and we will always employ any new technologies for these purposes along with any good they may bring. We will always have to carefully adjust the line on what is criminal vs artistic vs non-criminal depravity.

    • @CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      32 months ago

      I just don’t see why you’d make the creation of this stuff illegal. Right now you could be easy photoshop to put people’s faces onto dirty pictures. It hurts zero people and also takes a similar low amount of effort. As long as you keep it to yourself, society should not care.

      Making it illegal also seems kind of dumb when you can just hold someone civilly liable for this stuff if they’re posting nude photos of you, real or not. I don’t see the issue of any of it if we enforce these photos spreading as if they were real and let people collect damages.

  • AutoTL;DRB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    72 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    The creation of sexually explicit deepfake content is likely to become a criminal offense in England and Wales as concern grows over the use of artificial intelligence to exploit and harass women.

    Under a draft law, anyone who creates such an image or video of another adult without their consent — even if they don’t intend to share it — would face a criminal record and an unlimited fine, the UK justice department announced Tuesday.

    Laura Farris, the United Kingdom’s Minister for Victims and Safeguarding, told ITV Tuesday that “to the best of (her) knowledge,” the two countries within the UK would be the first anywhere in the world to outlaw the creation of sexually explicit deepfakes.

    The new offense applies only to adults as, under existing English and Welsh rules, creating deepfake sexual images of minors is already a crime.

    That month, a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the United States introduced a draft civil law that, if passed, will allow the victims of sexually explicit deepfakes to sue the people who create and share such content without their consent.

    “Deepfake pornography is a growing cause of gender-based harassment online and is increasingly used to target, silence and intimidate women — both on and offline,” Meta Oversight Board Co-Chair Helle Thorning-Schmidt said in a statement.


    The original article contains 530 words, the summary contains 215 words. Saved 59%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

    • @TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      People have been saying this since 2010 and it’s still not illegal.

      Tories are bastards who I can’t wait to be electorally destroyed, but I’m tired of seeing this line trotted out.

      There are zero signs that porn consumption will be a criminal offence.