Advice for judiciaries: Difference between revisions
Juho Kunsola (talk | contribs) m (lang fix) |
Juho Kunsola (talk | contribs) (rm headings in preparation for a move to How to protect yourself and others from covert modeling) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Digital look-alikes]] and [[digital sound-alikes]] prompt some changes to [[w:Rules of evidence|w:rules of evidence]] and updates to deniability. | [[Digital look-alikes]] and [[digital sound-alikes]] prompt some changes to [[w:Rules of evidence|w:rules of evidence]] and updates to deniability. | ||
Recordings that sound like someone saying something '''[[digital sound-alikes|may not be genuine]]''' and therefore the suspect should be allowed to state to the court "''I did never say that thing you got on tape.''" | Recordings that sound like someone saying something '''[[digital sound-alikes|may not be genuine]]''' and therefore the suspect should be allowed to state to the court "''I did never say that thing you got on tape.''" | ||
If '''[[Glossary#Media forensics|media forensics]]''' proves beyond suspicion the genuinity of the media in question or if credible witness to its creation is found, the media should be considered proof of person X having actually said that to a microphone. | If '''[[Glossary#Media forensics|media forensics]]''' proves beyond suspicion the genuinity of the media in question or if credible witness to its creation is found, the media should be considered proof of person X having actually said that to a microphone. | ||
Pictures and videos that looks like someone doing something '''[[digital look-alikes|may not be genuine]]''' and therefore the suspect should be allowed to state to the court "''I am not in that image/video.''" | Pictures and videos that looks like someone doing something '''[[digital look-alikes|may not be genuine]]''' and therefore the suspect should be allowed to state to the court "''I am not in that image/video.''" | ||
If media forensics proves beyond suspicion the genuinity of the media in question or if credible witness to its creation is found, the media should be considered proof of person X having actually had gotten imaged to the media. | If media forensics proves beyond suspicion the genuinity of the media in question or if credible witness to its creation is found, the media should be considered proof of person X having actually had gotten imaged to the media. | ||
Revision as of 15:14, 16 April 2019
Digital look-alikes and digital sound-alikes prompt some changes to w:rules of evidence and updates to deniability.
Recordings that sound like someone saying something may not be genuine and therefore the suspect should be allowed to state to the court "I did never say that thing you got on tape."
If media forensics proves beyond suspicion the genuinity of the media in question or if credible witness to its creation is found, the media should be considered proof of person X having actually said that to a microphone.
Pictures and videos that looks like someone doing something may not be genuine and therefore the suspect should be allowed to state to the court "I am not in that image/video."
If media forensics proves beyond suspicion the genuinity of the media in question or if credible witness to its creation is found, the media should be considered proof of person X having actually had gotten imaged to the media.