4 ms·

Australian law and courts have sovereignty in Australia, not US law. Second, what you wrote is out-of-date even if talking just about the (20) US states which

by smcin 2y ago

Australian law and courts have sovereignty in Australia, not US law. Second, what you wrote is out-of-date even if talking just about the (20) US states which do have deepfake laws, Politico article [0] discusses that there is very fragmented [US] state-level legislative and police response to US cases ("who gets [/doesn't get] disciplined, how minors are treated and who is responsible for taking images to the police — varies widely depending on the state.") Third, it's quite likely that more US states (plus say NZ, Canada, EU countries et al.) will rush to legislate explicitly against deepfakes, cyberbullying, and possibly doxxing, given how fast technology is advancing. Fourth, the tech industry, social-media companies, telecomm companies et al. will presumably try to come up with some common harmonized guidelines, because they operate in multiple countries. (But that gets us back to the ongoing CSAM - online privacy debate). Australian legislators will take a different approach to US ones on govt powers to scan people's images and messages, esp. without a warrant. [0]: Politico: "AI is shockingly good at making fake nudes — and causing havoc in schools" https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/28/ai-deepfake-nudes-schools-states-00160183 https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/28/ai-deepfake-nudes-s...

blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
Those state level laws wouldn’t hold up to a challenge. They nevertheless have a chilling effect on speech and set dangerous precedents. > Third, it's quite likely that more US states (plus say NZ, Canada, EU countries et al.) will rush to legislate explicitly against deepfakes, cyberbullying, and possibly doxxing, given how fast technology is advancing. This is just not going to happen without constitutional amendments, at least not in a way that sticks.
- smcin 2y ago
  I made multiple predictions about multiple countries plus some US states. > "...at least not in a way that sticks." The situation is changing very fast, faster than legislators can move. Even a bad law can give victims some power of legal discovery to prevent deepfake porn of them being made or published to public forums with the intent of harassing them. Equally they can also have a a chilling effect on (non-deepfake-porn) speech and set dangerous precedents. I'd expect NZ, Canada and western EU countries will (or already are) rush out some legislation. In the US it will depend on the individual state; 20 already have some legislation, but per the article their laws vary hugely. The Canadian federal Privacy Commissioner is scrutinizing Pornhub (Aylo Holdings) for previously allowing material without adequately verifying consent. All this area will surely be an active matter in policy-making, legislation and courts, ongoing: non-consensual deepfake porn and related issues (online identity rights, e.g. the Scarlett Johansson soundalike controversy), and the counterbalance on privacy and government intrusion. A standard might emerge for digitally signing explicit photos/videos by multiple parties, allowing people to add or remove consent.

by smcin 2y ago

blackeyeblitzar 2y ago

Those state level laws wouldn’t hold up to a challenge. They nevertheless have a chilling effect on speech and set dangerous precedents. > Third, it's quite likely that more US states (plus say NZ, Canada, EU countries et al.) will rush to legislate explicitly against deepfakes, cyberbullying, and possibly doxxing, given how fast technology is advancing. This is just not going to happen without constitutional amendments, at least not in a way that sticks.

smcin 2y ago
I made multiple predictions about multiple countries plus some US states. > "...at least not in a way that sticks." The situation is changing very fast, faster than legislators can move. Even a bad law can give victims some power of legal discovery to prevent deepfake porn of them being made or published to public forums with the intent of harassing them. Equally they can also have a a chilling effect on (non-deepfake-porn) speech and set dangerous precedents. I'd expect NZ, Canada and western EU countries will (or already are) rush out some legislation. In the US it will depend on the individual state; 20 already have some legislation, but per the article their laws vary hugely. The Canadian federal Privacy Commissioner is scrutinizing Pornhub (Aylo Holdings) for previously allowing material without adequately verifying consent. All this area will surely be an active matter in policy-making, legislation and courts, ongoing: non-consensual deepfake porn and related issues (online identity rights, e.g. the Scarlett Johansson soundalike controversy), and the counterbalance on privacy and government intrusion. A standard might emerge for digitally signing explicit photos/videos by multiple parties, allowing people to add or remove consent.