16

So a few weeks ago, a guy on Reddit came up with a tool for using AI to map someone's face into a video. Of course, it was immediately used to put celebrities into porn - something that up until this point has been no real issue.

However, it gained some news coverage because it looked kind of realistic, and now Reddit, Pornhub and Twitter have all banned fake porn.

https://www.reddit.com/r/celebfakes

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/pornhub-twitter-deepfakes-ban-ai-celebrity-faces-porn-actress-bodies-emma-watson-jennifer-lawrence-a8199131.html

Now I assume there has been a threat of legal action, because this content has never been banned before on any of those sites. So my question is, what legal precedent is there for someone to request a takedown?

So a few weeks ago, a guy on Reddit came up with a tool for using AI to map someone's face into a video. Of course, it was immediately used to put celebrities into porn - something that up until this point has been no real issue. However, it gained some news coverage because it looked kind of realistic, and now Reddit, Pornhub and Twitter have all banned fake porn. https://www.reddit.com/r/celebfakes http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/pornhub-twitter-deepfakes-ban-ai-celebrity-faces-porn-actress-bodies-emma-watson-jennifer-lawrence-a8199131.html Now I assume there has been a threat of legal action, because this content has never been banned before on any of those sites. So my question is, what legal precedent is there for someone to request a takedown?

11 comments

[–] PMYA [OP] 2 points (+2|-0)

It isn't quite at the point of looking real yet, but it is 80%. Another question to ponder is what happens when it isn't possible to tell if the porn is real or not?

To me this is straying into the area of the banning of cartoon images on the grounds that it is depicting children, the difference being that real people are involved here.

Regardless, I give it 24 hours before someone comes up with the idea of putting pornstars into SFW films.

To me this is straying into the area of the banning of cartoon images on the grounds that it is depicting children

I'm not sure that compares well. The reason cartoon images are banned, I assume, is because it is thought to promote pedophilia.
In this case, promoting lust for adults, is not a problem.

I don't think it would be handled as a 'porn' thing. I think it would probably be dealt with under copyright, and/or identity protections. Libel etc.
There's nothing criminal about the nudity, or images. It's just a questionable use of a likeness.

[–] PMYA [OP] 3 points (+3|-0)

Another thing has just occurred to me whilst thinking about this. It isn't an issue yet, but what happens in a few years when this is perfected and available to everyone? Video footage of crimes is going to become unreliable if you can't figure out if its real or not.

Also I did some googling for research. 7 fucking minutes long, (NSFW) it isn't perfect but I have never seen anything even approaching this length before.

for research

Heh.. Is lube and a sock typical research materials?

what happens in a few years when this is perfected and available to everyone?

Or one step further, using a 3d printer to make an Emma face for a sex-bot. Download Watson-AI for even more reality.
What about if you rented out the Emma-bot for prostitution?

The lines between reality and fiction are being slowly erased.

[–] Violentlight 1 points (+1|-0)

The program that became popular is free. With money, all video footage is unreliable.