Creating and distributing AI nudes of people was already illegal in Minnesota. This is a separate law that makes hosting or providing any service or “software” that has the ability to do that illegal. It is broadly worded and makes more than the intended target illegal, which was already illegal to begin with.
Subd. 3. Exemption. The prohibitions in subdivision 2 do not apply when the website, application, software, program, or other service requires the technical skill of a user to nudify an image or video.
I get the idea, but this doesn’t comfort me, because what is “technical skill” here? That seems subjective and will ultimately be up to a court to decide. What constitutes a skill? It’s prompting a skill? Is prompting Photoshop’s AI a skill? Their lasso tool is pretty easy to use. The line isn’t clear, and a clever lawyer, or a judge, or a jury could come down differently on what counts and what doesn’t.
I get the goal here. But I think we were already covered by the existing law that made distribution of these artificial nudes illegal.
“Prompting” isn’t a skill, that’s just asking for what you want. Same way as asking a barista for a drink doesn’t require the same level of skill as making it.
But in general yes that’s how arguments and decision-making works, for any law. These things aren’t mathematical proofs interpreted by computers, they’re people you convince of your point.
Creating and distributing AI nudes of people was already illegal in Minnesota. This is a separate law that makes hosting or providing any service or “software” that has the ability to do that illegal. It is broadly worded and makes more than the intended target illegal, which was already illegal to begin with.
Ehh, it seems pretty targeted to me, it’s defined to only apply to automatic apps or services, e.g. it specifically exempts manually created images.
Bans X from allowing grok to make naked pictures of celebrities but doesn’t apply to people using photoshop to do the same.
I get the idea, but this doesn’t comfort me, because what is “technical skill” here? That seems subjective and will ultimately be up to a court to decide. What constitutes a skill? It’s prompting a skill? Is prompting Photoshop’s AI a skill? Their lasso tool is pretty easy to use. The line isn’t clear, and a clever lawyer, or a judge, or a jury could come down differently on what counts and what doesn’t.
I get the goal here. But I think we were already covered by the existing law that made distribution of these artificial nudes illegal.
“Prompting” isn’t a skill, that’s just asking for what you want. Same way as asking a barista for a drink doesn’t require the same level of skill as making it.
But in general yes that’s how arguments and decision-making works, for any law. These things aren’t mathematical proofs interpreted by computers, they’re people you convince of your point.