4 ms·
You seem to be mixing two things there, or it's unclear what you mean. It's possible to mention someone by name and arrange for the image to be found under thei
by bloak 3y ago
You seem to be mixing two things there, or it's unclear what you mean. It's possible to mention someone by name and arrange for the image to be found under their name without claiming that the image is really of that person. For example, something that people have been doing for a long time, I think, is finding a porn actress who looks like Famous Person, adjusting their hairstyle and make-up to enhance the resemblance (in extreme cases including cosmetic surgery), and then advertising the pictures as "Famous Person Lookalike does XYZ". The client knows exactly what they're getting and there is no libel of the famous person. Would you want to make that illegal, or just the cases that are perhaps already covered by libel law and the Trade Descriptions Act?
- js8 3y agoYes, I think the "famous person lookalike" loophole should be illegal for generated images. All generated images are lookalikes, by definition. Also no tricks like "this is not a pipe". But I think we have to allow lookalikes that do not claim to be a specific lookalike, otherwise using human image generators is going to be too complicated legally, and I don't want to ban them.