Comment

Comment on Grok’s ‘spicy’ video setting instantly made me Taylor Swift nude deepfakes

Swift could easily get a lawsuit set up against them and most likely win. If she did, she’s already won the court of public perception or whatever it’s called ( drawing a blank ) because of how popular she is. I guarantee if she told people not to use grok or ex-twitter, a large of the swifties on the platform would run faster than Usain Bolt to delete their accounts.

source

Sort:hotnew top

insaneinthemembrane@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
Public opinion is what you were looking for there.

source
- AceFuzzLord@lemmy.zip ⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
  Yeah, my brain had stopped working. Thanks for the help.
  
  source
lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

Swift could easily get a lawsuit set up against them and most likely win

How would that work? If someone drew a photorealistic painting of pretty much the same, under what legal claim could Swift “most likely win”?

source
- bubblewrap@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
  Many jurisdictions have started banning nonconsensual intimate imagery, including the US (in several states as well as federally under the TAKE IT DOWN Act).
  
  source
  - lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    That seems recently signed into law (ie, untested in courts) & patently unconstitutional. Would that law prohibit obscene depictions of Trump?
    
    source
    frongt@lemmy.zip ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    Maybe. For photographs, it’s definitely not unconstitutional to make it illegal, because people have a right to privacy (4th amendment sort of, and 10th because they’re state laws).
    
    For Trump, and for non-photographic media, it’s a little different. For one, he’s a very public figure. Another, you could argue it’s artistic, satirical, or critical of him.
    
    Now if you were doing it maliciously, with intent to harass him personally, then yeah that would probably be considered not protected and carry civil or criminal liability.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
    bubblewrap@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    Well, the constitutionality will need to be tested, sure, but the US first amendment is not absolute, even if it is sweeping relative to other countries.
    
    Also, the US is not the only jurisdiction in the world. Plenty of other countries have put similar laws on the books over the last 2-3 years.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
sturmblast@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
That’s already happening

source