Turning to synthetic media, this chapter documents how AI-generated sexualised deepfake industrialises TFGBV: cheap production pipelines, cross-platform markets, and victim-targeting in elections and schools. It surveys Brazil’s recent cases and the overwhelming gendered pattern (nearly all sexual deepfakes target women), then analyses 2025’s Deepfakes Law, which outlaws creating and sharing synthetic sexual imagery using someone’s likeness and sets duties for intermediaries. It also tracks how the Supreme Court’s 2025 rulings revisit the Marco Civil’s liability model, articulating platform “duty of care” baselines in cases of misogyny. The chapter closes by weighing proposals to criminalise “misogyny” as such against Brazil’s penal-selectivity and racial-justice critiques and by mapping non-penal levers—procedural reforms, faster removal pathways, transparency and auditing of recommender systems, resourcing of public defenders and victim services, and education. The throughline is pragmatic: technical, legal, and cultural interventions must be co-designed to reduce harm without shrinking women’s expressive space.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

AI Chips in, and the Paths Ahead

  • Mariana Valente

摘要

Turning to synthetic media, this chapter documents how AI-generated sexualised deepfake industrialises TFGBV: cheap production pipelines, cross-platform markets, and victim-targeting in elections and schools. It surveys Brazil’s recent cases and the overwhelming gendered pattern (nearly all sexual deepfakes target women), then analyses 2025’s Deepfakes Law, which outlaws creating and sharing synthetic sexual imagery using someone’s likeness and sets duties for intermediaries. It also tracks how the Supreme Court’s 2025 rulings revisit the Marco Civil’s liability model, articulating platform “duty of care” baselines in cases of misogyny. The chapter closes by weighing proposals to criminalise “misogyny” as such against Brazil’s penal-selectivity and racial-justice critiques and by mapping non-penal levers—procedural reforms, faster removal pathways, transparency and auditing of recommender systems, resourcing of public defenders and victim services, and education. The throughline is pragmatic: technical, legal, and cultural interventions must be co-designed to reduce harm without shrinking women’s expressive space.