Author: Anurag Singh, New Law College BVP PUNE
Headline of the Article
Deepfakes and the Law: Confronting the Legal Vacuum Around AI-Generated Synthetic Media in the Digital Era
You can also consider these alternative headlines for different tones:
“Truth on Trial: The Legal Struggle Against Deepfakes in the Age of AI”
“Deceptive Realities: Navigating India’s Legal Blind Spot on Deepfake Technology”
“Deepfakes, AI, and the Law: Bridging the Regulatory Gap in Synthetic Media Governance”
Abstract
Deepfakes—realistic but fabricated audio-visual content created using Artificial Intelligence (AI)—have emerged as a powerful and dangerous tool in the digital age. From humorous content and cinematic uses to more insidious applications like political manipulation, identity theft, and cyber exploitation, deepfakes present a pressing legal and ethical dilemma. This article explores the legal grey areas surrounding deepfakes, focusing on Indian and global perspectives. While India recognizes the Right to Privacy as a fundamental right post-Puttaswamy v. Union of India, the current legal framework, primarily governed by the Information Technology Act, 2000, lacks specificity in tackling synthetic media. This paper highlights key legal principles, important judicial pronouncements, regulatory gaps, and proposes future legislation to manage the risks of deepfake technology without stifling innovation.
To the Point
Deepfakes are synthetic media generated using machine learning, specifically deep learning and Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs).
They can impersonate a person’s face, voice, or actions, creating realistic false content.
Deepfakes are being used for both creative and criminal purposes, including:
Political misinformation
Pornographic impersonation
Defamation and fraud
Tampering of digital evidence
India lacks a dedicated law to address deepfakes, though existing provisions under the IT Act, IPC, and the Constitution offer partial remedies.
Countries like the U.S. and China have already passed laws to combat malicious deepfake usage.
The need for regulation is urgent to protect privacy, dignity, and democratic integrity.
Use of Legal Jargon
Deepfake: Synthetic media where AI recreates real persons’ likeness or voice.
Generative Adversarial Network (GAN): A type of machine learning model used to generate deepfakes.
Right to Privacy: A fundamental right in India recognized in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017).
Misappropriation of Likeness: Using someone’s identity for gain without consent.
Cyber Defamation: Defamation committed via digital platforms.
Section 66E of the IT Act, 2000: Punishes violation of privacy.
Section 67 of the IT Act, 2000: Criminalizes publishing or transmitting obscene material electronically.
Contempt of Court: May arise if deepfakes are used to manipulate legal proceedings or evidence.
Digital Evidence Admissibility: Governed under Indian Evidence Act, Section 65B.
The Proof
a) Deepfake Incidents in India and Abroad
In 2020, a deepfake video of Indian politician Manoj Tiwari speaking in Haryanvi went viral during elections. Though it was for campaign purposes, it raised concerns on voter misinformation.
Celebrities like Gal Gadot and Scarlett Johansson have been targets of non-consensual deepfake pornography.
In 2023, an AI-generated deepfake video of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy asking troops to surrender spread across social media.
b) Legal Vulnerabilities
Victims face threats to reputation, employment, and emotional well-being.
Women are disproportionately targeted through deepfake pornography.
The absence of specific deepfake laws makes prosecution difficult.
False digital content can be used in litigation to frame or mislead—compromising the justice system.
c) Enforcement Challenges
Jurisdiction issues with cross-border sharing.
Difficulty in tracing creators of deepfakes.
Lack of digital literacy among the general population.
Case Laws
i) Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017)
The Supreme Court recognized the Right to Privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21.
Deepfakes violate privacy when they misuse personal identity or likeness without consent.
ii) Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015)
Although this case struck down Section 66A of the IT Act for being vague, it reiterated the importance of free speech within constitutional limits. This balance becomes critical when regulating deepfakes.
iii) Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020)
Highlighted the importance of freedom of expression and access to information. Laws targeting deepfakes must not suppress legitimate speech or parody.
iv) Katarya v. Google Inc. (2012 Delhi HC)
Though predating deepfakes, this case emphasized intermediary liability and takedown obligations, which are applicable to deepfake content hosted online.
v) People v. Clark (California, 2020)
One of the first cases where deepfake video evidence was rejected in court, highlighting admissibility concerns.
Conclusion
Deepfakes sit at the intersection of technology, law, and ethics. While they offer innovation in film, gaming, and education, their misuse can destabilize democracies, ruin reputations, and erode public trust. The current Indian legal framework is inadequate to fully address the threats posed by synthetic media. Relying on general provisions like defamation, cyber laws, or privacy violations under the IT Act is insufficient.
There is a need for a dedicated “Synthetic Media Regulation Act” or an amendment to the Information Technology Act, 2000. This legislation must:
Clearly define deepfakes and synthetic media.
Criminalize malicious creation and distribution of deepfakes.
Introduce a framework for consent-based digital likeness use.
Establish a real-time reporting and takedown mechanism.
Empower the judiciary and regulatory bodies with training and tools to identify and assess deepfakes.
Additionally, digital literacy, technical detection tools, and international cooperation must go hand-in-hand with legislation. Only then can we protect democratic integrity, personal dignity, and digital truth.
FAQs
Q1: What are deepfakes?
A: Deepfakes are AI-generated videos or audio clips that imitate a person’s likeness, often making it seem as though they said or did something they never did.
Q2: Are deepfakes illegal in India?
A: There is no specific law against deepfakes yet, but they may be punishable under privacy, defamation, or cybercrime provisions.
Q3: Which law currently applies to deepfakes in India?
A: Mainly the Information Technology Act, 2000 (Sections 66C, 66D, 66E, and 67) and IPC Sections on defamation and obscenity.
Q4: Can deepfakes be used as evidence in court?
A: Deepfakes raise serious concerns about digital evidence reliability. Under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, admissibility requires authenticity verification.
Q5: Which countries have laws against deepfakes?
A: The USA (in states like California, Texas), China, and the EU have enacted or proposed laws targeting malicious deepfake use.
Q6: What should victims of deepfakes do?
A: File a complaint with the cybercrime portal (cybercrime.gov.in), report to the platform, and seek legal redress under IT and defamation laws.
Q7: What reforms are needed?
A: India needs a specific synthetic media law, better detection tools, platform accountability, and public awareness initiatives.
