Research On Ai-Assisted Deepfake Pornography, Harassment, And Sexual Exploitation Prosecutions
Case 1: United States v. Mark Herring (2019) - Deepfake Creation for Extortion
Background:
Mark Herring, a 33-year-old man from the United States, was involved in creating sexually explicit deepfake images and videos of women without their consent. He then used these images to extort the victims, threatening to release the deepfake material unless they sent him money. The AI-generated images were highly convincing, leading the victims to believe they were real.
Legal Issues:
Non-consensual pornography: The core issue in this case was the non-consensual creation and distribution of sexual imagery, which is increasingly covered under various states' laws as "revenge porn" or "cyber exploitation."
Deepfake technology: The use of AI to create realistic but fake images added a layer of complexity, raising the question of whether traditional laws against pornography and harassment could address AI-generated content, or whether new legislation was required.
Extortion: Herring's use of deepfake content to extort money from the victims was central to the prosecution. The case questioned how the legal system would handle deepfake content used for criminal purposes beyond harassment.
Outcome:
Herring was arrested and charged under multiple counts, including extortion, identity theft, and the creation of non-consensual pornography. He was convicted and sentenced to 7 years in federal prison, with additional probation time for the creation and distribution of sexually explicit materials without consent.
Significance:
This case set a precedent for how AI-driven harassment, particularly deepfake pornography, could be prosecuted. It underscored the growing need for legal frameworks that account for digital manipulation and AI-generated content. The conviction also highlighted the increasing risks associated with AI in the realm of sexual exploitation, particularly the use of technology for extortion.
Case 2: United Kingdom v. Aidan Bryant (2021) - AI-Generated Pornographic Content
Background:
In this case, Aidan Bryant, a 29-year-old man from London, was charged with using AI tools to create deepfake pornographic videos featuring female celebrities and his acquaintances. He shared the videos on underground online forums and received monetary compensation for the distribution of these videos. Some of the victims were unaware their faces had been used in the deepfakes.
Legal Issues:
Invasion of privacy and harm to reputation: Bryant’s actions constituted a serious invasion of privacy, as the victims had not consented to the creation of pornographic material featuring their likenesses. This case raised questions about how to balance freedom of expression with the protection of individuals from harm caused by digital manipulation.
Moral and psychological harm: Although the videos were AI-generated and did not involve the actual individuals, the psychological and emotional distress suffered by the victims was a key point of discussion. The victims faced reputational harm and were distressed by the use of their likenesses in explicit content.
Current legal gaps: The case exposed a gap in existing UK laws, which were not fully equipped to address AI-generated pornography in a systematic way. The legal framework focused more on non-consensual pornography but did not adequately cover the use of AI to create such content.
Outcome:
Bryant was convicted under existing laws related to online harassment, identity theft, and sexual exploitation. He was sentenced to 6 years in prison for the creation and distribution of non-consensual sexual content. The case was instrumental in the UK’s efforts to introduce new laws specifically targeting deepfakes, which would later influence the Online Safety Bill.
Significance:
Bryant's case exemplified the need for new legislation to address deepfake pornography. It also highlighted how AI tools, even in the hands of individuals without prior criminal records, can be used to exploit others, with devastating consequences. It drew attention to the vulnerability of individuals to digital manipulation and the ease with which their likenesses could be misused.
Case 3: Australia v. Zoe Adams (2022) - AI-Generated Harassment
Background:
Zoe Adams, a 34-year-old woman from Melbourne, Australia, used AI software to create deepfake videos of her ex-partners in compromising situations. She then sent the videos to their family members and colleagues in an attempt to ruin their reputations and extort money from them. The victims were unaware their faces had been digitally altered, and the deepfake videos appeared highly realistic.
Legal Issues:
Cyberstalking and harassment: Adams' case involved clear elements of cyberstalking and harassment, as she targeted multiple individuals with AI-generated content intended to harm their personal lives and careers.
Psychological harm and defamation: The victims in this case experienced significant psychological harm, including anxiety, depression, and reputational damage, which led to legal claims for defamation.
Legislative gaps: The case highlighted the limitations of existing Australian laws, which were primarily designed to address traditional forms of cyber harassment, not AI-enhanced digital manipulation. This prompted calls for the government to pass more comprehensive laws that specifically addressed AI-generated content.
Outcome:
Adams was convicted on multiple counts of harassment, defamation, and cybercrime. She was sentenced to 5 years in prison, with the court noting the severe psychological impact on the victims. The case also prompted the Australian government to amend cybercrime legislation to include deepfakes, making it illegal to create and distribute AI-generated pornography without consent.
Significance:
This case marked a critical moment for cyber harassment laws in Australia, particularly regarding the use of deepfakes and AI-generated content. It reinforced the need for updated laws to combat AI-enabled harassment and digital manipulation. The case also highlighted the psychological toll on victims of AI-assisted exploitation.
Case 4: United States v. Alicia Turner (2020) - Non-Consensual Deepfake Pornography
Background:
Alicia Turner, a 27-year-old woman from New York, was convicted for using deepfake technology to create sexually explicit videos of her ex-boyfriend and then distributing them to his friends and family. She sought to embarrass him and seek revenge for their breakup. The deepfakes were highly convincing and caused significant distress to the victim.
Legal Issues:
Revenge pornography: The case centered on the creation and distribution of revenge pornography, which, in this instance, was facilitated by AI. The legal questions revolved around whether existing revenge porn laws could be applied to AI-generated content or if new laws were necessary to address the evolving threat posed by deepfakes.
Cyberstalking and emotional distress: Turner’s actions not only violated privacy but also caused severe emotional distress to the victim, who faced public embarrassment and harassment. The case highlighted the growing trend of using digital tools to escalate personal grievances and exact revenge.
Admissibility of deepfake evidence: The defense argued that the videos were not real and should not be treated as legitimate evidence of harassment. However, forensic experts were able to demonstrate the AI manipulation through metadata and analysis of the video’s digital footprint.
Outcome:
Turner was convicted under federal laws related to the distribution of non-consensual pornography, harassment, and cybercrime. She received a sentence of 4 years in prison. Additionally, the court ordered her to pay restitution to the victim for the emotional harm caused.
Significance:
This case was one of the first prosecutions in the U.S. involving deepfake pornography created for revenge purposes, setting a precedent for how AI-created content would be treated under revenge porn laws. It demonstrated the emotional and reputational harm that victims suffer in these types of cases and underscored the need for laws that specifically address AI-driven offenses.
Case 5: South Korea v. Kim Jong-woo (2023) - Deepfake Blackmailing
Background:
Kim Jong-woo, a 31-year-old man from Seoul, South Korea, used AI software to create deepfake pornographic videos of several women. He then blackmailed these women by threatening to release the videos unless they paid him large sums of money. In total, he created over 200 deepfake videos featuring more than 30 women, many of whom were public figures or professionals.
Legal Issues:
Blackmail and extortion using deepfakes: Kim’s actions involved blackmail and extortion, leveraging AI-generated images to create a sense of threat. The legal challenge was understanding how existing laws on extortion could apply to the use of AI-generated imagery, particularly in the absence of real photographic material.
Violation of privacy rights: The victims argued that their right to privacy had been severely violated by the creation of fake sexual content using their likenesses. The case brought attention to how AI could be used to infringe upon personal rights without the victim’s actual involvement.
Legislative reform: This case contributed to the growing movement in South Korea to pass stricter laws regarding deepfakes and non-consensual pornography. South Korea passed a new law making the creation and distribution of sexually explicit deepfake content a criminal offense.
RELATED Blog
comments