
Deepfake pornography, with videos of popular actresses having millions of views - totaldude87
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/deepfake-porn-websites-videos-law
======
Mirioron
I don't see how you can fight this. You can try to ban the videos, but the
technology is eventually going to get so good and spread so much that you will
be able to do this on demand. No video uploaded to a website necessary.

~~~
Decker87
I think you can fight it becoming mainstream or easy to find, kind of like
other types of illegal porn.

------
gedy
That's a drag, and I'd hate to have this happen to someone, however regarding
this:

"Non-consensual deepfake videos, that humiliate and demean women... Nothing is
being done about them"

the cynic in me suspects that the outrage to "do something" would be abused by
Hollywood to push for even more laws, restrictions, content analysis and
distribution blocking of non-porn, independent content.

~~~
Nasrudith
Well the whole thing is not only a moral panic but a clumsily pushed one that
moronically invokes rape for tasteless art by invoking it for what is at best
essentially an intellectual property issue.

I recall hearing about voice actor guilds limiting or barring synthesized
voices for job security so obviously they fear being replaced with machima
essentially (which shouldn't be a problem if they can actually act and provide
a better response than what the director initially imagined).

------
matt-attack
I’d be curious to know if the actresses who are being faked, would have a
similar problem if I were to, say, make a life like painting of them being
naked. Artists sell images of actors all the time. People know they’re
paintings.

I’m struggling to understand the distinction here. The digital creation is
just a painting. It’s a digital painting. It’s 1000s of digital paintings
being showed in sequence.

You may be tempted to think the issue is that when consumers view an oil
painting of a naked actress they know it’s fake. Where as deep fakes could
leave less knowledgeable viewers under the impression that the actress in
question actually performed in pr0n. Ok so mandate that deep fakes are labeled
as such.

Clearly it’s ok to do it in oil on canvas so when does it become wrong when
done digitally? There’s simply no victim here.

~~~
Valgrim
The crime here is called libel, and the victim is the person being faked, who
could sue to recover damages caused by a loss of reputation.

~~~
abstractbarista
Since libel is "a published false statement that is damaging to a person's
reputation", what if the videos were titled appropriately, clearly indicating
it is not _actually_ the celebrity in the video.

Instead of "<Celebrity Name> <Sex Act>", it could be titled "DeepFake
Rendering of <Celebrity Name> <Sex Act>".

While videos could still damage the reputation of someone (only in the eyes of
those who disapprove of porn), there is clearly no "false statement" being
made.

~~~
pvaldes
This is not about false statements. Is about lotta money.

The body, image and look of famous people is their brand. Is why actress are
generously paid to sell parfums, anti-age potions and lipstick and is the
reason why lots of families take their children to cinema.

Linking this image to porn (or racism, or anything nasty) in the previous week
to a expensive film's premiere can damage seriously their investment and turn
an innocent people into poison for box office

In the same way, a deep fake porn of a candidate can destroy the lucrative
source of business that represents being elected or not.

My bet is that would soon be detected as a major treat for a lot of huge
companies and will be crushed, nuked and drown in a lawyers tide before 24h
from the release.

------
allan_s
late to the party but I'm wondering if deepfake could be used by the
pornindustry to make more content

like you got 1 high visible actress, 10 lookalike-ish , less paid, but you
deep fake the high visible actress on same, so that you can create more
content at cheaper rate ?

