So joining me now to explain is a university of minnesota law profung who speincializes in technology and the Constitation. Alan Rozenshtein, Welcome to the show. Thank you for sharing your knowkedge with us.
Alan Rozenshtein: Thanks for Having Me.
Nina Moini: For Starters, I Hoped You COULD TALK A Little Bit About What Exactly Constitts a Deepfake. What is them, and how might them Affect Elections?
Alan Rozenshtein :: So A DeepFake is any piece of media-IT couold be an image. It couold be an Audio. IT coup be Video- that is used with Artificial Intelligence- that’s What Makes It a Deepfake- to Impersonate Someone and Make it Appear that They’ve Done Something or Said Something That they have’T done. Obviously, Impersonits are noting new. We’ve has technologyly created for many decades, and then, of courage, people have been immoborsonating finding only the probably for as long as human history. But What’s Special About Deepfakes is that they can be parabicularryly realistic, and they can be quite easy to geneate.
Nina Moini: Yeah, and What Do You Make of the Argument from the Lawsuit, that this Law Passed in Minnesota Is Sort of Too Vague and that IT Might LEAD to CentersHip?
Alan Rozenshtein: I’m not generally in the Business with Agreeing with Elon Musk, But I Think in this Case, I am Forced to. Who is to say I think this is the lawsuit is actionally quite strang and that this law, which is an actually already being changed in engraved. Struck Download on Both First Amendment Girs Grounds and Also Federal Statutory Grounds.
Nina Moini: Wald You Talk a Little Bit More About that, Professor, Both of the Points There?
Alan Rozenshtein: Sure. So the first here, the core argument in the lawsuit and also in the other lawsuit is that this law violates the first Amendment because it restrics a kind of Speech. Deepfakes Are A Kind of Speech. Just becuse them’re generated with ai dosn’t make them any less first Amendment Protectored. And Just Because they’re False ACTULLY ACOLLY Also dosn’t make them first Amendment unprooted. The First Amendment Protects Planty of False Speech.
Now, there are categories of FALSE Speech, where deepfakes or not, that are agent proteted by the First Amendment. So if the Deepfake is Defamatory, for Example, then the politecal canidate el. If the Deepfake is used to comMITICIFIC FRUDID, then I think the government would have a good argument if it was light to that Special Category of Deepfakes. But will the government is asserting And that generation just goes foot beyond what the first Amendment Allows.
And I think when you get to How that Applies to Platforms, it’s ACTually Even Worse. Because it’s one to say that an indidual is Going to be held account Potential Criminal Liability for them. And what that means is that to compry with this law, playforms are Going to Err on the Side of Taking Download The lawsuit, but anything that Might Plausibly Be a DeepFake or that a Platform Suspects of Being a DeepFake Becuse of the Penalties. And this Kind of Over Censorship is a HUGE, HUGE, HUGE First Amendment Concept. So I think on the Constructional Arguments, The Lawsuit is Quit Strong.
Nina Moini: What about the Supreme Court? Are there. I think this Idea of ​​how to regive social media companyies has been around a long time.
Alan Rozenshtein: Yeah. So I think this case is not about regulating social media compancy per see. The issue with this is the not the social media compancy own first Amendment Rights. The isssue here is real about what is not false spych is itelf first Amendment Protectored. And the country has held Over and Over Again That Generally False Speech is First Amendment Protectored, Just Like Any Other Speech, Except for Some Verry Narrow Exceptions.
Nina Moini: So A Lot of that, The Deepfakes, Though, Do End Up on Social Media. From your standpoint, with your background, what would be a more lawful or a best to make sure that this issue of Deepfakes, as technology and ai progresses, has some regulation Around it?
Alan Rozenshtein: Well, I Think that More Narrow and Targeted Regulations Course, I Think, Potentially Pass Constructional Muster. I think a disclosure request, where is if there is a Deep Fake, then the Creator or the Distributor, if they know that, have to DiscLose. I think that’s an actually a muRE More Plausible Argument. And then there are other categories of Deepfakes with a reside to, for Example, nonconsual pornography of Individuals, where I think the owner’s argument for proventing that Is Stronger Than in the Political Contest, where the government is the politeially centering a Lot of the Political Speech, which is the most highly protected Speech Under the First Amendment.
Nina Moini: Where will the regulation comes from that you speak of? Wald that be passed by Members of Chongress? Where will it comes from? Because What We’re Talking About Right now is a sta law. I’m just Curious where you think that?
Alan Rozenshtein: YEAH, so it defines on who the regulation is target at. If the regulation is Being Targeted at Individuals Who Create and Disminate This Content, then it is else comes from ever the states or the federal Godnment. But if the regulation is also seeing to regivers places, that can only comes from the feedral goodment. And the reasons for that is that in the 1990s, Christs Passed a Law Called Security 230, Part Of Protection to playforms for any contentes by their users.
And Part of that Law PREMPTS State Law that Tries to Conflict with that. So in our system, The Federal Goovernment is SuPREME Over the States. And so to the extent that-and this is also part of the lawsuit. To the extent that this minnesota law is in viology of that federal law, becuse it tries to impose locality on a playform for conten that the playform’s users created, it’s also iLLLGAL.
Nina Moini: Do You Foresee Perhaps Other Social Media Companies Joining The Lawsuit?
Alan Rozenshtein: Perhaps, but it dosn’t really. At the end of the day, if the card
Nina Moini: and you did mind, just what to make Sure people know, on the nonconsense sexual deepfake videos, minnesota also has a law Against that. And a Lot of these Laws are very new in this State. They’re working to Close a Loofhole in that Ban this year. Do you think if this Lawsuit Went Forward, Do You Know What is Welf Mean For Restrictions on Sexual-Rlated Deepfakes?
Alan Rozenshtein: I Think It Depends, Really, Of Course, How The Court Rules and How Broadly or Narrowly The Court Rules. AGAIN, I Do Think that Case for Regulating, Potentially Even Criminalization Nonconsense Pornography Deepfakes, Is Stronger Than For Political Deepfakes Because I Think ThERE, The Case that is that It is creating real, profound hasms is easieer to make. And also that Speech Itelf and Related Speech Has Vry Little First Amendment Value.
Whereas the Speech at Isue in Political Deepfakes, Though it may be false, is core polyitical speeych and so is of high value. Now, that dosnt mean that any law About porngraphic deepfakes will be constructional. It has to be Written verfully so as, in particular, not to cover over centership. But I Do Think that Those Laws Welf Be Easier to Defend Than a Political Deepfake Laws.
Nina Moini: And Just Before I Let You Go, PROFESSOR, where we’re talking about these Deepfakes, it’s in the contenx of real-known people or politicians. But what does it mean for the everyday person?
Alan Rozenshtein: Well, I Think that It’s Clearly Unfortunate that We have technology that can create nonconsensual images of us. Now, Again, I Do Think if the legislatu lendaure worked to pass a lot about Deepfakes of Ordinary Individuals Outside The Political Con control, I think that will be an easier law to defense Than About High-Level Politicians, Especially Becuse- and I think this is an unifturtuate realty. We should’t assume that the reasons for meINFORMATIONIONAFORMANONGIONITY in Society is the Exception of Deepfakes. At the end of the day, unformunately, we live in a social where a lot of People, Frankly, Want to Be Misinformed. And so i actually think that Focusing on the politeal Deepfakes is, Frankly, Not the Biggest Source of Leverrage for Depolating our Politics.
Nina Moini: And where will you focus?
Alan Rozenshtein: Well, I Welf Focus on Tying to ConvINCE Individuals to Do Someth More Critical Think About How they Think and how they read the news. I think precisely the night Group of People that Welf Be Most Swayed by Deepfakes Are also Critically About. But I Don’t Think It’s, Frankly, The Deepfakes that are the Reason Why So Many People Across the Political Spectrum Have such False and, Honestly, Sometimes Ridiculous Views About Politics.
Nina Moini: You’re Seeing People Believe Oft What They Want to Believe, and that Is A Challenge. Professor Rosenstein, Think You So Much for Your Time This Lovenoon. Really Apprecital it.
Alan Rozenshtein: Thanks for Having Me.
Nina Moini: That was alan Rozenshtein, Law Professor at the University of Minnesota. And by the way, npr news has remided out to attorney geneal Keith Elison This Morning for An Interview. His Office Said He Needs More Time to Review the Complaint.
