Extract from Jon Fowler’s article “Deepfakes on Trial: Can the Law Keep Up With Faked Reality?”
Deepfakes, the hyper-realistic manipulation of videos and images, are a growing concern. While we’re familiar with their potential to disrupt elections and create social media memes, their impact on the legal system is even more alarming. Deepfakes threaten the very foundation of legal proceedings: evidence.
Blurred Lines of Authenticity and a Shifting Burden of Proof
The ease with which deepfakes can be created throws a wrench into how courts handle video and image evidence. Traditionally, recordings were assumed to be accurate. Now, courts face a crucial question: Who proves a recording is real when it could be a deepfake?
Currently, the burden of proof lies with the party presenting the evidence. They must demonstrate the recording is authentic. However, deepfakes might necessitate a change in this approach. Some argue the presenting party should always prove authenticity. After all, they’re the ones trying to use the recording’s content. This would encourage creating strong evidence trails. The chain of custody (who made the recording and when) and the recording process itself would be documented thoroughly. However, this approach could also discourage the use of legitimate recordings, especially if the burden of proof is too high.
