Taylor Swift Explicit A.I. Images Condemned By SAG-AFTRA

SAG-AFTRA calls explicit A.I. images of Taylor Swift that are circulating on social media “upsetting, harmful, and deeply concerning.”

A post on the SAG-AFTRA website details the issue.

More from Deadline

“The sexually explicit, A.I.-generated images depicting Taylor Swift are upsetting, harmful, and deeply concerning. The development and dissemination of fake images — especially those of a lewd nature — without someone’s consent must be made illegal.

“As a society, we have it in our power to control these technologies, but we must act now before it is too late. SAG-AFTRA continues to support legislation by Congressman Joe Morelle, the Preventing Deepfakes of Intimate Images Act, to make sure we stop exploitation of this nature from happening again.

“We support Taylor, and women everywhere who are the victims of this kind of theft of their privacy and right to autonomy.

The ability to create fake images has grown exponentially recently as commercial A.I. sites have risen. Some are devoted to creating nude images of celebrities, requiring only a picture of a subject.

Several bills have been introduced in state legislatures, including the SAG-AFTRA support of one by Illinois Congressman Joe Morelle. So far, they haven’t become law, as First Amendment concerns have dampened enthusiasm. The introduction of the technology to a high-profile celebrity like Swift may change some minds.

In an interview airing Tuesday on the NBC Nightly News with Lester Holt, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said that action must be taken to stop the distribution of the images, and called for companies to begin the process.

The calls for crackdowns on A.I. deepfakes is drawing concern from civil liberties advocates.

In May of last year, the ACLU of Illinois — while admitting that deepfakes can cause serioous harm — but voicd concerns that adding deepfakes to the existing revenge porn statute in the state uses “language (that) lowers existing legal thresholds.”

A California bill introduced in 2019 was quickly opposed by the ACLU of California and several press rights organizations, citing free speech concerns.

Best of Deadline

Sign up for Deadline's Newsletter. For the latest news, follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.