AI Generated Videos

[JonasMartinWolf]

Dafne Keen

 

[lugiweezer]

Georgia May Foote?

Melissa joan hart with beth broderick would dream.

 

[Yeyodemon]

Happy to do any requests

You must be registered for see links

Please could you do something hardcore with antigoni Buxton?

 

[Ukguy6191]

3 space cuties

 

[Stoneyloon]

All I'm reading about just now is that ofcom are urgently trying to stop Grok, how long before someone is prosecuted for making these?

 

[ti62v]

All I'm reading about just now is that ofcom are urgently trying to stop Grok, how long before someone is prosecuted for making these?

I read about that yesterday, something to do with people using it to undress kids.

 

[Stoneyloon]

I read about that yesterday, something to do with people using it to undress kids.

Not just kids, I've seen a couple of interviews now where normal woman are saying they are seeing the videos if them being undressed etc.

 

[polotoon]

Apols for this missive ...

The main problem authorities have in terms of prosecution is that they have to prove the person made the images (as opposed to just finding them somewhere online and re-posting them). Secondly, the prosecution has to prove that the images were made with the intention of harassing or humiliating the person involved. Thirdly, the prosecution has to prove that the person making the images was doing so for sexual gratification (as opposed to just doing it for a laugh).

For example, posting an image of Holly Willoughy showing her knickers for shits and giggles isn't going to cross the theshhold of illegality. Sending that image to her personally and saying: "I'm jerking off to this image of you" could potentially get you into legal issues.

That's my interpretation of current UK law. Ps. Don't ask me to be your barrister.

Biggest issue is, the establishment has got musk as there number 1 target.
They hate him and he hates them.
If this was any other platform making these I doubt there would be this much fuss.
Dont think it will be long in this gestepo run government before they put a bill forward making it illegal for all these ai generated sites
So enjoy while we can

 

[Sherpa11]

Teammates.

View attachment 3269952

I just can't stop laughing about these A.I. generated stuff's. The A.I. doesn't care about the laws of Physics! Anyway, thx for upload! It's the APP I'm laughing at, not you or anyone else! ;-)

 

[NaplesGuy]

Biggest issue is, the establishment has got musk as there number 1 target.
They hate him and he hates them.
If this was any other platform making these I doubt there would be this much fuss.
Dont think it will be long in this gestepo run government before they put a bill forward making it illegal for all these ai generated sites
So enjoy while we can

Can someone start a discussion thread on this? Save us clogging-up this one with chat? Sharing prompts, sites, legality, etc. etc.? I for one would appreciate it.

 

[NaplesGuy]

Love that prompt

Thank my perverted mind. It says: Thanks. Who is that girl btw? She's sexy.

 

[mattygrewie1]

Kate.

View attachment 3270413

Very nice

 

[FrankOz90]

Happy to do any requests

You must be registered for see links

Angele Van Laeken please

 

[hamsie]

Holly teasing us.

View attachment grok-video-f0d4c6cf-ef25-4962-a654-63ac8d20c0b4 (9).mp4

 

[Mayfields]

Happy to do any requests

You must be registered for see links

Lucy Pinder please

 

[Landscape]

Happy to do any requests

You must be registered for see links

Alice Levine please.

 

[johnnyq]

The main problem authorities have in terms of prosecution is that they have to prove the person made the images (as opposed to just finding them somewhere online and re-posting them). Secondly, the prosecution has to prove that the images were made with the intention of harassing or humiliating the person involved. Thirdly, the prosecution has to prove that the person making the images was doing so for sexual gratification (as opposed to just doing it for a laugh or out of boredom).

Example: posting an image of Holly Willoughby showing her knickers for shits and giggles isn't going to cross the theshhold of illegality. Sending that image to her personally and saying: "I'm jerking off to this image of you" could potentially get you into legal issues.

Example: Posting an AI photo or video of your ex girlfriend having her cervix rearranged by a big black cock and saying: "My ex girlfriend was a slag" could potentially get you into legal issues.

There is also the other issue of forums like this not taking due dilligence.

That's my interpretation of current UK law. Ps. Don't ask me to be your barrister. I better go, someone is knocking on my door.

None of this is true. In fact it's woefully ignorant. NaplesGuy appears to be referencing the old "revenge porn" law. I say "old" because it's no longer in force.

The current UK law is the Sexual Offences Act as amended by the Online Safety Act. Under the current law, the prosecution don't have to prove any of the things claimed above. All they have to prove is that the accused posted the images online, that's all.

Basically, if you post an AI altered "intimate" image of someone online, that's a criminal offence in the UK, punishable by up to 6 months in prison. The bad news is that each victim can be charged separately. In the well publicised case of Brandon Tyler, for example, although the maximum punishment is 6 months he was given a prison sentence of 5 years. His name was also added to the Sex Offenders Register.

What does this mean in practice? It basically means that if you have posted an AI created intimate image online, either in this forum or elsewhere, in the UK you are now a sex offender. You may not have been caught, but in the eyes of the law you are a sex offender.

PS. This is a link to Brandon Tyler's entry on the Sex Offenders Register. Notice it says he was convicted for SHARING manipulated images. That's all the prosecution had to prove, that he shared them.

You must be registered for see links

 

[Rockula]

None of this is true. In fact it's woefully ignorant. NaplesGuy appears to be referencing the old "revenge porn" law. I say "old" because it's no longer in force.

The current UK law is the Sexual Offences Act as amended by the Online Safety Act. Under the current law, the prosecution don't have to prove any of the things claimed above. All they have to prove is that the accused posted the images online, that's all.

Basically, if you post an AI altered "intimate" image of someone online, that's a criminal offence in the UK, punishable by up to 6 months in prison. The bad news is that each victim can be charged separately. In the well publicised case of Brandon Tyler, for example, although the maximum punishment is 6 months he was given a prison sentence of 5 years. His name was also added to the Sex Offenders Register.

What does this mean in practice? It basically means that if you have posted an AI created intimate image online, either in this forum or elsewhere, in the UK you are now a sex offender. You may not have been caught, but in the eyes of the law you are a sex offender.

PS. This is a link to Brandon Tyler's entry on the Sex Offenders Register. Notice it says he was convicted for SHARING manipulated images. That's all the prosecution had to prove, that he shared them.

You must be registered for see links

Seems like a dangerously vague law. A photographer who shoots nude photos and uses ai enhanced programming could be subject to prison time for doing their job if a model chooses to argue that she wants her images removed. Obviously there are nuances but at the very least it could cost a lot of legal fees. Every Playboy photographer should be on notice. But yes, can we move this to a discussion thread?

 

[johnnyq]

A photographer who shoots nude photos and uses ai enhanced programming could be subject to prison time for doing their job

Not true. Photographers are covered by the model release form.

 

[Rockula]

Not true. Photographers are covered by the model release form.

Again, nuance and legal fees. They likely wouldn't end up losing but there could easily be a court case and a prudish judge can be swayed. British vs US legal systems obviously differ but here in the states it's happened in civil suits.