SINGAPORE: Last month, it emerged that , spoofing skinny photos , of Singapore Sports School individuals had been created and circulated by colleagues.
Officials, including Foreign Affairs Minister Vivian Balakrishnan, were able to recover this after receiving blackmail letters containing fabricated, vulgar images earlier in 2024.  ,
A recent and growing scourge has been identified as an “explosion” of deepfakes created using artificial intelligence ( AI ) techniques to alter visual and audio content.  ,
What are the legitimate alternatives?  ,
According to attorneys, works involving these fake photos may fall under the Penal Code.
” As these are all critical arrestable crimes, the officers did research and if the offender can be found, the issue would probably result in state prosecutors”, said Mr Cory Wong, chairman of Invictus Law.  ,
He cited certain Penal Code provisions that might apply to the Singapore Sports School patients, who could be between 13 and 18 years old.  ,
According to Mr. Wong, one who creates algorithmic AI video with a child’s mouth on under the age of 16 may face a criminal record for purposefully creating child abuse stuff under Section 377BH of the Penal Code.
This can lead to a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison, plus possible fines or canings.
For distributing baby abuse stuff, a man could be jailed up to seven years, and can , even be answerable to a good or to punishment.
If the patients are aged 16 or below, the offences may fall under Area 377BE of distributing close pictures, said Mr Wong.  ,
A possible excellent and punishment are associated with this section. It can serve as a maximum sentence for up to five years.  ,  ,
Under the Protection from Harassment Act ( POHA ), those who , intentionally cause harassment, alarm or distress could be charged as well. And this could use to creators , and marketers of photoshopped sexuality,  , said Ms Tania Chin, chairman of the dispute division at TSMP Law.
Patients may also submit a POHA request to obtain a protection order against the offender.  ,
According to Mr. Wong, a security order might contain conditions allowing the offender to remove the material and refrain from publishing or disseminating it.  ,
He acknowledged that a sufferer may not be able to sue every social media person who distributes the content, making a protection order in this situation “pointless.”
Under Singapore’s Films Act, custody or development of an outrageous algorithmic video could also be an infraction.