This is not at all about protecting children. That’s just manipulation. In truth, kids are more likely to prosecuted than protected by this bill.
There are already laws that could be used against teen bullies but it’s rarely done. (IMHO it would create more harm than good, anyway.)
This is part of an effort to turn the likenesses of people into intellectual property. Basically, it is about more money for the rich and famous.
This bill would even apply to anyone who shares a movie with a sex scene in it. It’s enough that the “depiction” is “realistic” and “created or altered using digital manipulation”. Pretty much any photo nowadays, and certainly any movie, can be said to “altered using digital manipulation”. There’s no mention of age, deception, AI, or anything that the PR bullshit suggests.
Bgugi@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Well those laws clearly don’t work. So we should make new laws! Ones thatDL DEFINITELY WILL work! And if they don’t, well I guess we just need more laws until we find ones that do.
NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Since we need a rule explicitly for AI related cases, even though it’s already covered by others, lets ensure that we also make a 100 page law for if the material is explicitly made in Photoshop, and also another 80 pages if it was made in Gimp. If you use MS Paint to do it, we need a special 200 page law that makes the punishment even harsher, because damn you got skillz and need to be punished more.
LWD@lemm.ee 8 months ago
Can you point to anything wrong in the specific law that is being proposed?
Bgugi@lemmy.world 8 months ago
No, I’m not criticizing the bill’s content. If you don’t enforce laws, new ones won’t work either. The new ones are, at best, an opportunity for people to huff and puff and pat themselves on the back at the cost of actual victims. At worst, it’s smoke and mirrors for what the new law actually does.
LWD@lemm.ee 8 months ago
What is the difference between the bill’s content which you aren’t criticizing, and what the law actually does?
If the law would be bad, can’t you criticize the content of the bill in such a way that it wouldn’t do anything bad?