Judge halts California’s new deepfake law – Washington Examiner
A federal judge has blocked California’s newly enacted deepfake law, which aimed to combat political disinformation, just two weeks after Governor Gavin Newsom signed it. The decision came after a lawsuit from Chris Kohls, known online as “Mr. Reagan,” who had created and shared a parody video that imitated Vice President Kamala Harris’s voice. Kohls argued that his video was protected by the First Amendment as satire, a claim the judge upheld, stating that the law could suppress political speech and overly restrict expression. While some requirements of the law, such as mandating verbal disclosures for altered audio, were deemed reasonable, the judge criticized the law for being excessively broad and hindering legitimate uses of parody and satire. Kohls’s attorney expressed satisfaction with the ruling, emphasizing the importance of protecting free speech amidst concerns over deepfake technology’s potential to mislead voters.
Judge blocks California’s new deepfake law
A federal judge blocked an artificial intelligence deepfake law Wednesday that protects against political disinformation just two weeks after Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) signed it into law.
The ruling is the result of a lawsuit filed by Chris Kohls, known as “Mr Reagan” on X. Kohls is the original poster of an AI video that replicated Vice President Kamala Harris’s voice and went viral on X this summer. The video caught Newsom’s attention and prompted him to create the law. X owner Elon Musk reposted the video, making it even more widespread.
Kohls argued in the lawsuit that the video was a parody and was, therefore, protected by the First Amendment. Senior U.S. District Judge John A. Mendez agreed that the law suppressed political speech.
“Most of [the law] acts as a hammer instead of a scalpel,” Mendez wrote, calling it “a blunt tool hinders humorous expression and unconstitutionally stifles the free and unfettered exchange of ideas.”
The law was found to be too broad, reaching past defamation and claiming satire and parodies could be harmful to an election. Simpler requirements, such as mandatory labeling, could fix portions of the law that are overreaching.
The judge recognized that there are important areas of the law, such as the requirement of verbal disclosure of digitally altered content in audio-only recordings, calling them “not unduly burdensome.”
Kohls’s attorney, Theodore Frank, wrote in a statement that they were “gratified that the district court agreed with our analysis.”
Kohls’s post, which he defines as a parody but does not write or state so in the video, used AI to recreate Harris’s voice, having her say she was the “ultimate diversity hire” and other derogatory comments toward President Joe Biden. The AI technology used to manipulate audio and video is so advanced that, without clear parody labels on videos, it’s easy to mistake the distortion for reality.
“Deepfakes threaten the integrity of our elections, and these new laws protect our democracy while preserving free speech. Satire remains alive and well in California — even for those who miss the punchline,” wrote Izzy Gordon, a spokeswoman for Newsom, in a statement.
The statement also reminded Californians that the law is not the only one of its kind. There is a similar law in Alabama that restricts deepfake AI videos.
On Thursday, Musk posted the lawsuit’s ruling on X, celebrating the court’s decision.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 3, 2024
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
