header-logo header-logo

29 November 2022
Issue: 8005 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal , Technology , Privacy
printer mail-detail

Tackling deepfakes, downblousing & hidden cameras

A criminal offence of sharing ‘deepfakes’—explicit images or videos which have been manipulated to look like someone without their consent—is to be added to the Online Safety Bill, in a Ministry of Justice (MoJ) amendment.

The Bill, which would introduce fines and site blocks for social media platforms that fail to protect users from harmful content, is to return to Parliament next week. It was previously delayed amid Boris Johnson’s resignation and withdrawn from the schedule in October following Liz Truss’s resignation.

‘Deepfakes’ typically use editing software to make and share fake images: for example, a website that virtually strips women naked received 38m hits in the first eight months of 2021.

The government also intends to introduce a package of laws tackling abusive behaviour such as installing hidden cameras and ‘downblousing’, where photos are taken down a woman’s top without her consent. These include a new offence of sharing an intimate image without consent and two more serious offences based on intent to cause humiliation, alarm or distress, and for obtaining sexual gratification. Two specific offences will be created for threatening to share images and installing equipment to enable images to be taken.

The proposed reforms build on recommendations made by the Law Commission in July, in its paper ‘Taking, making and sharing intimate images without consent’.

Ruth Davison, CEO of Refuge, which campaigned for threatening to share intimate images with intent to cause distress to be made a crime, welcomed the proposed reforms.

However, some civil liberties organisations, including Liberty, have expressed concerns about elements of the Bill, including that restrictions on ‘legal but harmful’ content are too vague and could restrict free speech, and that it creates a two-tier approach to online and real-world communications.

Other concerns include that the Bill obliges online platforms to assess the content, which they are likely to do via machines and algorithms, thus removing any nuance.

Issue: 8005 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal , Technology , Privacy
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

From first-generation student to trailblazing president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, John McElroy of Fieldfisher reflects on resilience, identity and the power of bringing your whole self to the law

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Planning and environment team expands with partner hire in Manchester

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Firm appoints chief operating officer to strengthen leadership team

NEWS
A landmark Supreme Court ruling has underscored the sweeping reach of UK sanctions. In NLJ this week, Brónagh Adams and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper say the regime is a ‘blunt instrument’ requiring only a factual, not causal, link to restricted goods
Fraud claims are surging, with England and Wales increasingly the forum of choice for global disputes. Writing in NLJ this week, Jon Felce of Cooke, Young & Keidan reports claims have risen sharply, with fraud now a major share of litigation and costing billions worldwide
Litigators digesting Mazur are being urged to tighten oversight and compliance. In his latest 'Insider' column for NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School provides a cut out and keep guide to the ruling’s core test: whether an unauthorised individual is ‘in truth acting on behalf of the authorised individual’
Conflicting county court rulings have left landlords uncertain over whether they can force entry after tenants refuse access. In this week's NLJ, Edward Blakeney and Ashpen Rajah of Falcon Chambers outline a split: some judges permit it under CPR 70.2A, others insist only Parliament can authorise such powers
A wave of scandals has reignited debate over misconduct in public office, criticised as unclear and inconsistently applied. Writing in NLJ this week, Alice Lepeuple of WilmerHale says the offence’s ‘vagueness, overbreadth & inconsistent deployment’ have undermined confidence
back-to-top-scroll