• Ulrich@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    88
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    You may not have noticed there was a nude AI deepfake of Trump that’s been viewed tens of millions of times, aired on Comedy Central.

    • panda_abyss@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      56
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      That’s satire though.

      Under any reasonable court (big caveat for American courts right now) that’s free speech.

        • 51dusty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          how can an ai bot pull a free speech defense? free speech is, ostensibly, reserved for people…?

          • Ulrich@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            25
            ·
            2 days ago

            Are you under the impression that the AI bot was not created by people?

            • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              So? The manufacturer of the product is not responsible for how people use the product. Otherwise there would be no gun manufacturers anymore.

              • Ulrich@feddit.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                22 hours ago

                They are, however, responsible if the product they created does illegal things.

          • Ulrich@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            11
            ·
            2 days ago

            Based on what? Who have you seen be convicted of making deepfake porn? Under what law?

            • SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              23 hours ago

              Uhm, there have been plenty of cases of people getting in trouble for sharing deepfake porn yes. It’s sexual harassment.

              Well, at least over here in Europe, and it’s mostly been with teenagers, I don’t know the situation on the US

              But generally, making and sharing porn of real people is… well… that can very easily count as sexual harassement

            • SnausagesinaBlanket@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              28
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              Under what law?

              Take it down act

              On April 28, 2025, Congress passed S. 146, the TAKE IT DOWN Act, a bill that criminalizes the nonconsensual publication of intimate images, including “digital forgeries” (i.e., deep fakes), in certain circumstances.

              • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                2 days ago

                Is providing it over a private channel to a singular user publication?

                I suspect that you will have to directly regulate image generation

              • Ulrich@feddit.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                10
                ·
                2 days ago

                Hmm, interesting, thanks. Has anyone been charged or convicted with this law yet?

                • Cethin@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 hours ago

                  Definitely not convicted. That’d be some crazy speed.

                  However, your insistence that it hasn’t happened yet so can’t happen is insane. There has to be a first case in which it hadn’t happened before.