Gavin Newsom signs bill to illegalize deepfake political ads in California

[acidhead]

🤡

 

Edited September 18 by Saru
Fixed thread title

[preacherman76]

Where are the “book banning” crowd on this one? Satire is now illegal in California. 
 

Combine this with cackling Kamala on how X needs to follow the same, non existent rules Facebook follows. That free speech must be regulated by the government. We have quite the fascist agenda being set up. 
 

I see several of our elected stating how we need to bring up Hillary’s plan for reeducation camps to rid ourselves of maga and embrace globalism, by force. 
 

Scary

[MrAnderson]

8 hours ago, acidhead said:

🤡

 

Demonstration of what is to be a clown! At least we get plenty of entertainment for free.

Edited September 18 by MrAnderson

[Gromdor]

I can see the logic behind it.

Identity theft isn't free speech.  Posting memes where you steal someone elses likeness to convey a message isn't you expressing Freedom of Speech, it's you trying to subvert their words and their freedom of speech.

[MrAnderson]

2 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Where are the “book banning” crowd on this one? Satire is now illegal in California. 
 

Combine this with cackling Kamala on how X needs to follow the same, non existent rules Facebook follows. That free speech must be regulated by the government. We have quite the fascist agenda being set up. 
 

I see several of our elected stating how we need to bring up Hillary’s plan for reeducation camps to rid ourselves of maga and embrace globalism, by force. 
 

Scary

The book banning crowd are hiding as it's not a convenient story and turn of events. Cheering for freedom of speech as long as it suits their position and views.

[DayoOlabisi]

3 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Where are the “book banning” crowd on this one? Satire is now illegal in California. 
 

Combine this with cackling Kamala on how X needs to follow the same, non existent rules Facebook follows. That free speech must be regulated by the government. We have quite the fascist agenda being set up. 
 

I see several of our elected stating how we need to bring up Hillary’s plan for reeducation camps to rid ourselves of maga and embrace globalism, by force. 
 

Scary

i'm not familiar with the details on this, but if you're actually knowingly passing off information you know to be untrue in an effort to defraud someone of value (even if it's the value of their vote) then that should be as illegal as any other type of fraud, ceteris parabis. of course, i don't doubt that there might be a lot of bad stuff in that bill and other legislation that claims to accomplish this. but on it's face, the principle is good in my opinion.

if something is satire or parody, there can be some indication that it is. for instance, presented by a site that is known to present such materials, or by a source that isn't known to present such satire but accompanies the material with a disclaimer of some sort. i'm open to discussions about the finer details and exceptions that need to be accounted. but this is probably healthy, especially considering where technology is going. there's no reason to openly advocate that intentional fraud should be allowed. we would need a high barrier to prove someone knowingly committed the fraud, but we shouldn't protect the fraud in cases where it is clear.

 

[Claira]

14 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

I can see the logic behind it.

Identity theft isn't free speech.  Posting memes where you steal someone elses likeness to convey a message isn't you expressing Freedom of Speech, it's you trying to subvert their words and their freedom of speech.

I concur. It doesn't appear as though the new law is as draconian as some are making it out to be. Given the proliferation of deepfakes, not to mention attempts by foreign entities to interfere with US elections, surely the prevention of disinformation and the manipulation of communications would be of benefit to all sides, would it not? Whilst deepfakes and other political misrepresentations are hilarious at times, they are also capable of eroding public trust — that's not something either side should want ahead of important elections.