3 ms·

For what it's worth, I kind of agree, this is a pretty big loophole that essentially makes revenge porn legal. It's gonna be about 2 seconds before you start se

For what it's worth, I kind of agree, this is a pretty big loophole that essentially makes revenge porn legal. It's gonna be about 2 seconds before you start seeing disgruntled exes of every kind putting up deep fakes of porn encounters. But I tend to file that under "This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things". The reality is that when that happens, and we all know it will, the good legislators will be under ENORMOUS pressure to close that loophole, and that loophole will be closed. Same thing happened with regular revenge porn, it was "loophole legal" at first, then the law came down on it like a hammer because the pressure just grew too large. The amount of time behind bars that they give out for revenge porn is increasing even as we type. To be completely honest, I'm fairly certain this act won't pass muster as it's written specifically because the revenge porn loophole is in it. The combination of the anti-revenge porn ladies and the law enforcement people will just make this way too risky a "yes" vote for anyone in a competitive district.

kakarot 8y ago
To quote my earlier comment: > if a deep fake is used to specifically target and harass an individual on a personal level ... then afaik that is already covered by existing harassment laws.
- bilbo0s 8y ago
  The issue is, a deep fake, is clearly a parody. This can't be argued. That's the purpose of a deep fake at its root. So you need a more narrow definition. If I do a deep fake of Melania giving Trump a golden shower in Moscow, that goes way beyond parody, even though it is, technically, by definition, parody. So there is no way to say that is not a personal attack, AND there is no way to say that is not a parody. That's the loophole that needs to be closed. You can try to argue that showing a hot school teacher or some male cop performing oral on a roomful of men was only parody, but if you get away with it there will be about 20 seconds before the law is changed. All the activists and the law enforcement people will claim that we just can't have video of every ex-girlfriend, cop, school teacher, or boss in the nation involved in whatever sexual activity seems the most degrading.
  - kakarot 8y ago
    > If I do a deep fake of Melania giving Trump a golden shower in Moscow, that goes way beyond parody, even though it is, technically, by definition, parody. By what principle is this the case? > That's the loophole that needs to be closed. You're not closing a loophole. You're limiting free speech.

kakarot 8y ago

To quote my earlier comment: > if a deep fake is used to specifically target and harass an individual on a personal level ... then afaik that is already covered by existing harassment laws.

bilbo0s 8y ago
The issue is, a deep fake, is clearly a parody. This can't be argued. That's the purpose of a deep fake at its root. So you need a more narrow definition. If I do a deep fake of Melania giving Trump a golden shower in Moscow, that goes way beyond parody, even though it is, technically, by definition, parody. So there is no way to say that is not a personal attack, AND there is no way to say that is not a parody. That's the loophole that needs to be closed. You can try to argue that showing a hot school teacher or some male cop performing oral on a roomful of men was only parody, but if you get away with it there will be about 20 seconds before the law is changed. All the activists and the law enforcement people will claim that we just can't have video of every ex-girlfriend, cop, school teacher, or boss in the nation involved in whatever sexual activity seems the most degrading.
- kakarot 8y ago
  > If I do a deep fake of Melania giving Trump a golden shower in Moscow, that goes way beyond parody, even though it is, technically, by definition, parody. By what principle is this the case? > That's the loophole that needs to be closed. You're not closing a loophole. You're limiting free speech.