• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    401 month ago

    do these recent depictions of kamala not fall under the recent ban on likenesses of people in sexually compromising images?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      261 month ago

      They’re fucking stupid, but satire is protected speech (and images like this of public figures have long been ruled to be satire).

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          71 month ago

          No one’s going to confuse a cartoon for the real thing, but the AI fakes are explicitly designed to do so.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          71 month ago

          Satire porn is also considered free speech. (I’m not kidding) The difference is that it needs to obviously be satire and clearly fake. As I see it, that’s the difference between the AI porn law and satire porn. I also think the new AI law hasn’t been tested in the courts yet for things like that.