Political Deepfakes and the Limits of Regulation

An AI policy scholar at the University of Denver examines Louisiana and Maryland deepfake laws to illustrate the limits of regulation, according to an article from governing.com. The article is titled 'Political Deepfakes and the Limits of Regulation.' It presents the two state laws as examples through which the scholar assesses what regulation can and cannot accomplish in the political deepfake context. The article uses the two states as case studies. The article does not identify the scholar by name.

Louisiana requires AI warnings on certain campaign ads that falsely depict candidates. Maryland prohibits certain deceptive election deepfakes even when they carry a warning. The contrast between the two approaches is central to the article's discussion. Louisiana's requirement operates as a warning rule for a defined category of campaign advertisements. Maryland's prohibition applies to deceptive election deepfakes and extends to cases where a warning is present, and both laws address deepfakes in the context of elections.

The article states that the scholar uses these laws to illustrate the limits of regulation. It also indicates that the two states have adopted different legal responses to political deepfakes. Louisiana's warning requirement and Maryland's prohibition are presented as examples of how state law addresses synthetic media in elections. The article's focus is on what these laws reveal about the boundaries of regulatory responses to political deepfakes. The article presents these laws as examples rather than as a comprehensive survey of state deepfake regulation.