@TommyGuhn I’m fairly sure it’s the other way around. Either imagination is fine, or deepfakes need to be outlawed. Doubtless some people would want the outlawing, but I’m all for imagination.
Legally it’s prohibited. Sites distributing it are infringing a number of laws. It’s about time the law will be enforced on these.
1 Like
Might aswell just “abs duct” Emma Watson… it’s better than deepfakes and imagination. right? (chill, i’m making a point.)
What about copyright issues it entails. So far, we link videos straight to their sources and compilations of short clips is fair game. I’m pretty sure someone’s likeness count as potential copyright infringement or something along the lines. So there’s another reason to not allow them.
Now, this topic is similar to the Loli content discussed a few months ago now. I personally am ok with loli content being its animated and done by a studio who, im sure, have lawyers to look into the legality of it these days. BUT if loli content were to be purged from this site, I would not miss it or take offense.
- Brought it up because it is illegal in the UK and if i remember right, Australia. The tag and media remains here even through a Poll by the community.
My view on this subject is a no go. Since its not any studio who is going through the hoops of legality to make this work. Youd have to get permission/consent from the actor/actress in use and the studio/company who created the scene the imagery is being “deepfaked”. Sounds like royalties and sounds like it would have to be payed to have access to. Not something someone with access to the software and spare computing power should be legally allowed to do.
I appreciate this community and respect many of the people on it. I enjoy interacting with others on here aswell! I like how we can have these discussions and opinions on things brought up every now and again. I feel like I can get an informed decision and different views on things after reading 'em.
TLDR: Not a fan of Deepfakes as a media other then a dumb meme about someone singing Chug jug with you or enter other cringy parody song here. I get a few laughs out of them anyway.
1 Like
I didn’t say all anything, I was explaining that people have different ideas and to assume you know everyone’s thoughts is ignorant. Witney cummings was the celeb I saw taking about it, she has a real doll that looks just like her and her and burt and tom were taking about making a sex tape to market her special. Then started taking about deep fake and putting their face on porn star bodies and if it would be more funny if they were fit or fat.
1 Like
Most loli content are made in Japan which is legal there and if a specific one isn’t, there’s a loop-hole. They don’t really export it much either. Personally 3d lolis creep me out, specifically those that tries to imitate real life. 2d lolis, ironically… many of their body proportions are closer to real life average or petite or short and thick women.
Before anyone use meme deepfakes as an excuse…
Sex deepfakes requires consent, memes deepfakes are kind of like pranks, so it does not require consent. Some won’t mind to be in either but let’s not assume they all do.
1 Like
It doesn’t matter, it’s fake, if I draw a stick figure of you doing something stupid, do I care if you wanted to be depicted? When people write fan fiction people don’t lose their mind. Its literally fake, says it everywhere. Again I don’t understand this debate at all, we aren’t creating deepfakes. What does the mortality of deep fake matter to this site? The video exists script it or don’t, watch it… or don’t. But to tell people what their allowed to crank it to is a new level of self important.
2 Likes
Yes sure, compare complex videos with texts, you can change the font… so it’s basically the same, right?
It’s not only a question of morality, there’s also legality. To make sure this community doesn’t get in trouble. If you can find a loophole to get around it, be my guest. We should at least follow the laws the top 3 porn streaming websites has to follow.
1 Like
can you read, i already posted the law in the thread. doesnt apply to the deep fake site let alone a site that doesnt create deepfakes, but instead makes scripts for sex toys… this fourm wouldnt even be culpable even if deep fakes were agains the law… . because again we dont create deep fakes. but that doesnt even apply because the law says if its marked fake its not against the law.
1 Like
We discussed this as a moderator team, and our decision is to not allowed deep fakes. This decision was made because these videos are non-consensual. Other people have also pointed out that this is illegal in a number of states, and I’d assume more will move to ban it in the future.
I’ve updated the Site wide rules, but this might revise the wording a bit over the next few days.
6 Likes
well its like you literally cant read, show me the law? child porn is def against the law but yall cool with that.
1 Like
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/3805/text
Also no one here is pro CP
1 Like
again learn to read…
“(2) the term ‘deep fake’ means an audiovisual record created or altered in a manner that the record would falsely appear to a reasonable observer to be an authentic record of the actual speech or conduct of an individual;
loli is child porn
1 Like
I believe you are the one who cannot read:
“(b) Offense.—It shall be unlawful to, using any means or facility of interstate or foreign commerce—
“(1) create, with the intent to distribute, a deep fake with the intent that the distribution of the deep fake would facilitate criminal or tortious conduct under Federal, State, local, or Tribal law; or
“(2) distribute an audiovisual record with—
“(A) actual knowledge that the audiovisual record is a deep fake; and
“(B) the intent that the distribution of the audiovisual record would facilitate criminal or tortious conduct under Federal, State, local, or Tribal law.
Its more important that the genre is non-consensual in its very nature, and that it seems that a significant majority of users are strongly opposed to it.
We’re not lawyers, something being ‘technically legal’ is beyond any of our capacity to say, and ultimately it would be up to a judge to interpret in the case of any legal action. But in any case, “technical legality” isn’t the only requirement for something being allowed on the site.
There’s a separate thread discussing loli/shotacon, feel free to post in that topic if you want to discuss it.
the quote i sent you is from the page you linked. it says in terms you might understand, if its labeled fake its not against the law. just because team against is more vocal dosn’t mean more people are on that team? so i can just go start commenting on all the loli posts telling everyone they’re gross and well ban it? its not “technically” legal. its just legal. “technically legal” means nothing. spineless pushovers, social justice warriors. what about rape scenes can we still post them?
I have simplified this for you to understand.
Offense - It be unlawful create with intent distribute deepfake with intent distribution would facilitate criminal tortious conduct or distribute audiovisual record with knowledge record is deepfake and intent distribution of record would facilitate criminal tortious conduct under Federal, State, local, or Tribal law
Part of what I do professionally is consult lawyers and be familiar with the law itself. (cybersecurity usually)
Deepfakes are not technically illegal. They ARE illegal.
Harassment, revenge porn, potentially illegal use of likeness without a release, libel if you can convince a judge a record is speech, All of these things a deepfake entails, are various levels of illegal.
It could be a civil suit, it could be criminal charge, it’s still illegal.
While we’re on the law, Loli, is not CP. The difference is made very clear in law. One, is animated, not including real children, digitally inserted or otherwise. The other, is fake in 100% of it’s assets. Though I personally am not a fan, I respect others rights to make that decision for themselves.
im sorry i think your having a brain fart. i litterally linked you text defining deep fake. here ill do it again. this is from your link.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/3805/text
this is called a definition, its a legal term to describe what a word means. …
“(2) the term ‘deep fake’ means an audiovisual record created or altered in a manner that the record would falsely appear to a reasonable observer to be an authentic record of the actual speech or conduct of an individual;
the important part of this is “would falsely appear to a reasonable observer to be an authentic record” so when these videos are all labeled and watermarked saying FAKE all over the place… do you understand more now? you must be bad at your job if you cant understand simple legal text.
1 Like
@hyn - last warning, ditch the ad hominem attacks and aggressive attitude. Disagreement is fine, but keep it civil and pleasant.
I’ll be suspending you the next time I see any personal attacks or aggression in your posts.
Regarding rape - if the video is of actual nonconsensual sex, then yes it would be prohibited. If it was “rape themed”, then that would be consensual, and would therefore be allowed.
More on topic:
@hyn is correct about the watermarks. The 2019 DEEPFAKES bill explicitly requires watermarks to make such videos legal.
And as I said, the not-so-clearcut legality of deepfakes is not the primary reason that they have been added to a list of not-allowed content. Obviously the law is changing in a variety of places and isn’t fully settled yet. The technology is also changing rapidly, so what applies today may not be relevant tomorrow.
The law trails behind tech so radically that I don’t really take laws about technology particularly seriously. Governments move too slowly to adequately legislate when it comes to rapidly-evolving fields like deepfakes. So I don’t think that the “it’s legal, therefore it’s OK” argument is sufficient.
6 Likes
After debating DM’s I think I understand where the back and forth is on this. He was solely concerned with the forum, whilst we were concerned about the people in the videos.
1 Like