They created a fake video with my face: what can I do?

The spread of artificial intelligence has made it possible to create images, photographs, audio recordings, and videos that are extremely realistic, in which a real person can be depicted as speaking words, performing actions, or exhibiting behaviors that they have never actually engaged in. These are known as deepfakes, artificially manipulated content created through increasingly sophisticated technological tools. The legal problem arises particularly when a person’s image or voice is used without consent, and the content is presented or perceived as authentic. In these situations, various fundamental rights of the individual may be involved, including the right to one’s image, the right to privacy, the right to personal identity, dignity, and reputation. The issue becomes even more delicate when the video falsely attributes to the person behaviors, statements, or situations capable of damaging their personal or professional standing. The fact that the video was created artificially does not mean it is devoid of legal consequences. On the contrary, the ability of new technologies to make a completely false representation credible can produce particularly significant harm. The first course of action when discovering that one has been depicted in a fake video is to not underestimate the situation and to immediately preserve every useful element to demonstrate what occurred. It is advisable to capture screenshots, retain the link to the page, note the date and time of discovery, identify the account from which the content was published, and document, as much as possible, the number of views, comments, and shares. Preserving evidence is crucial because online content can later be deleted, modified, or republished elsewhere. It is also necessary to identify, when possible, who created the content, who published it, and through which platform it was disseminated. Depending on the specifics of the case, removal of the video, cessation of dissemination, deletion of images, and any other measures suitable to prevent the continuation of the harm may be requested. Particular attention must be paid to the context in which the deepfake is used. Content that is clearly ironic, satirical, or overtly artificial has completely different characteristics from a video created with the intent to deceive the public and make it believe that a behavior that was never performed is genuine. Thus, the legal assessment depends on the content, the methods of creation, the purpose of publication, the number of people reached, and the concrete consequences produced. The situation can be even more serious when the fake video attributes to the person unlawful, offensive, dishonorable, or professionally incompatible behaviors with the role they occupy. In such cases, the dissemination of the content can directly impact the person’s reputation and social standing, potentially leading to consequences in family, work, professional, and commercial relationships. The protection of one’s image thus assumes central importance. A person cannot be considered consenting to the use of their image simply because a photograph or video portraying them was already available on the Internet. The availability of an image online does not equate to a blanket authorization for its manipulation, transformation, and use for purposes other than those originally intended. The creation of artificial content using a person’s face therefore may require an independent assessment compared to the simple publication of the original image. The voice can also become the subject of manipulation. Modern technologies indeed allow for a very precise reproduction of a person’s speaking manner and the insertion of their voice into conversations or statements never made. An artificial audio falsely attributed to a professional, entrepreneur, or private individual can lead to concrete consequences and must therefore be assessed in relation to its content and actual dissemination. A particularly sensitive chapter involves so-called sexual deepfakes, in which a person’s face is artificially inserted into intimate images or videos. In such cases, the violation of dignity, privacy, and image can assume particularly serious gravity, and specific protective measures foreseen by the legal system may come into play, including on the criminal level, in addition to possible civil consequences. Even in this realm, it is crucial to act promptly, preserving evidence and attempting to prevent the material from continuing to be disseminated or replicated. If the dissemination of the deepfake leads to concrete harm, the possibility of seeking damages may also be considered. The quantification of harm cannot be automatic and must be linked to the consequences actually produced by the conduct. Depending on the cases, the severity of the content, the duration of dissemination, the number of people who have become aware of it, the nature of the accusations or representations contained in the video, and the repercussions on the affected individual’s private, family, or professional life may be relevant. It is particularly important to distinguish simple discomfort from legally relevant harm. Not every unpleasant content automatically creates a right to compensation, but when the unlawful use of one’s image, voice, or personal identity results in concrete and demonstrable harm, the legal system can offer various protective tools. In certain circumstances, urgent measures may also be considered, especially when the continued presence of the content online risks progressively worsening the harm. The speed of intervention can thus assume decisive importance. A fake video can be created in a matter of minutes and reach an enormous number of people in extremely short time. Its subsequent removal does not always automatically eliminate the consequences already produced, especially when the content has been downloaded, copied, or republished on other platforms. For this reason, when faced with a deepfake, it is not sufficient to simply ask who created the content. It is essential to immediately assess what is the most effective strategy to document the fact, block its dissemination, protect the image and reputation of the person involved, and, when applicable, seek compensation for damages. Artificial intelligence does not represent a lawless zone: even in the digital world, the fundamental rights of individuals continue to hold full relevance. The face, voice, name, identity, and reputation do not become freely usable goods merely because they can be artificially reproduced. When a technology is used to construct a false representation of a person and that representation produces real consequences, the issue becomes legal and requires concrete evaluation. Therefore, anyone who discovers a fake video featuring their face should act swiftly, preserving all evidence of the publication, identifying the dissemination methods, and immediately assessing the available tools to obtain the removal of the content and protect their rights. In the digital world, indeed, a falsehood can be artificially constructed in a matter of seconds, but the damage to a person’s reputation can last much longer.