THE SENATE UNANIMOUSLY passed a bipartisan bill to provide recourse to victims of porn deepfakes — or sexually-explicit, non-consensual images created with artificial intelligence.

The legislation, called the Disrupt Explicit Forged Images and Non-Consensual Edits (DEFIANCE) Act — passed in Congress’ upper chamber on Tuesday.  The legislation has been led by Sens. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), as well as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) in the House.

The legislation would amend the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) to allow people to sue those who produce, distribute, or receive the deepfake pornography, if they “knew or recklessly disregarded” the fact that the victim did not consent to those images.

  • @MagicShel
    link
    51 month ago

    Is this just “AI porn bill” because that’s the most common way of doing it these days? I should expect the product is what’s being sanctioned and not the method.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      261 month ago

      Not just AI…

      …any intimate visual depiction of an identifiable individual created through the use of software, machine learning, artificial intelligence, or any other computer-generated or technological means….

      This probably also covers using MS Paint.

      • @MagicShel
        link
        61 month ago

        Back to my hand drawn stick figure celebrity porn, I suppose.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          111 month ago

          As long as it can’t be mistaken for the actual person it moves the stigma from them doing weird things to the artist doing weird things

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        141 month ago

        From the text of the bill:

        The term ‘digital forgery’ means any intimate visual depiction of an identifiable individual created through the use of software, machine learning, artificial intelligence, or any other computer-generated or technological means, including by adapting, modifying, manipulating, or altering an authentic visual depiction, that, when viewed as a whole by a reasonable person, is indistinguishable from an authentic visual depiction of the individual.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          5
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Thanks. So photorealistic paintings are still legal, although I suppose they’re not a big problem in practice. It’s still weird that the method of creation matters, although “any other technological means” is pretty broad. Are paintbrushes a technology? Does using a digital camera to photograph a painting count as creating a visual depiction?

          I’m vaguely worried about the first-amendment implications.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            81 month ago

            I think it comes down to the last part - indistinguishable by a reasonable person as an authentic visual depiction. That’ll be up to courts to decide, but I think a painting would be pretty obviously not an authentic visual depiction.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        101 month ago

        This bill targets digital (computer made or altered) forgeries. Not hand-drawn sketches.