A Taiwanese YouTuber was arrested on Sunday on suspicion of producing “deepfake” pornographic videos using likenesses of politicians and Internet celebrities.
The arrest of Chu Yu-chen (朱玉宸), 26, and two others suspected of producing and selling the videos prompted politicians on Monday to propose legislation that would make such activity illegal.
Lawmakers should exercise caution in proposing such a law, which would put arbitrary restrictions on free expression, particularly when existing laws are sufficient to deal with cases like Chu’s. For example, it is illegal to produce and distribute pornographic material in Taiwan, and it is also illegal to publicly defame someone — which some might say some deepfakes would be.
Moreover, there are copyright laws that make it illegal to create deepfake videos from existing content.
There have also been cases of such videos being used to spread disinformation, such as one that circulated in 2019 depicting Facebook chief executive officer Mark Zuckerberg saying that he had “total control of billions of people’s stolen data.”
Taiwan has grappled with Chinese disinformation campaigns, which deepfakes might exacerbate, but the nation already has laws prohibiting the production and dissemination of false news reports.
A blanket prohibition on such videos would be counterproductive and ineffective. Those who produce illegal content using artificial intelligence and deepfake technology would be just as willing to use other means if such tools were banned. Banning them would simply mean that those who use deepfakes for legitimate content would face restrictions. This would set a dangerous precedent and would likely prompt questions over what other forms of expression should be outlawed.
For example, newspapers in most countries publish political satire in the form of cartoons, often depicting politicians or celebrities in unflattering contexts. Such cartoons are typically protected by free speech and freedom of the press rules. If legislators were to say that a cartoon was insulting, would they be justified in proposing legislation to make them illegal? Are new laws required every time technological advances create new forms of expression?
Taiwanese faced major restrictions on expression for decades under martial law, so they should be particularly concerned about protecting their freedoms.
An article in the Sun in the UK on Nov. 12, 2019, cited Canada’s Communications Securities Establishment cybersecurity agency as saying that deepfakes “pose a threat to modern democracy.”
However, the article said that deepfakes are not illegal in the UK, which is still the case today. The reason for the lack of legislation is because although deepfakes exacerbate the threat of infiltration by foreign forces or other malicious entities, the threat to democracy from restricting free speech is perhaps even greater. That might also be why social media platforms have not removed deepfake videos.
A more reasonable way to tackle the potential threat to national security would be to have a more informed public. As with all dubious media content, people should check where questionable videos come from, cross-check them against other information and contact authorities when unsure about the validity of content. Media assessment skills could be taught at schools and public service announcements could remind people to approach news reports critically.
Videos should only be illegal in extreme circumstances. If merely using a person’s likeness in a deepfake is deemed illegal, lawmakers will also need to grapple with the legality of using someone’s likeness in an animation or still image.
Lawmakers must be cautious about proposing regulations that impose arbitrary restrictions on freedom of expression.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry