Arizona regulates published digital identity thefts – TCPAWorld

Hello again TCPAWorld! Last week, on 21 May 2024, The Arizona legislature has passed an interesting bill: House Bill 2394. Unsurprisingly, this bill is similar to bills in New Mexico, Alabama, and Alaska. This bill aims to address the problem of digital identity theft in politics and beyond. So, if you are a political candidate on any ballot in the state of Arizona, or a citizen of this great state, you can obtain an injunction against a person who posts a digital identity theft 1) without your consent, 2) if the publisher either did not make it clear that the image or recording was a digital identity theft, or if it was not obvious to a reasonable person that the media was manipulated. The bill focuses exclusively on digital content that has been manipulated to convincingly replace one person’s image or voice with that of another using advanced artificial intelligence techniques.

“Digital impersonation” in the Act means “synthetic media, typically video, audio, or still images, that meet all of the following requirements: (a) have been digitally manipulated to convincingly replace the image or voice of one person with that of another. using deep generative methods and artificial intelligence techniques, or for which the likeness or voice of a person has been otherwise simulated using deep generative methods and artificial intelligence techniques; (b) was created with the intent to deceive reasonable listeners or viewers or to mislead them into believing that the content is authentic; (c) would mislead reasonable listeners or viewers into believing that it is a true and accurate representation of the voice or likeness of the person being impersonated and of something the person being impersonated said or did.”

The law allows any person whose identity has been digitally impersonated to file a lawsuit within 2 years from the date on which they become aware of the infringement.

If the imitation is part of a paid advertisingOnly the author or sponsor of the advertisement can be held liable.

As in Alaska, the law explicitly states that providers of interactive computer services will not be held liable for hosting or transmitting counterfeit content created by others, thereby protecting the platforms from undue legal burdens—with the focus on the creators and distributors of such content.

Victims can seek both a temporary and a permanent declaratory relief – that is, the court can make an immediate decision to prevent further harm from continued identity theft. The bill requires that The court must decide on applications for interim measures within two daysexcluding weekends and holidays.

An interim declaratory action may be brought if the imitation could result in significant personal or financial hardship, loss of employment opportunities or irreparable reputational damage.

In cases involving the imitation of sexual identities or the depiction of criminal acts, victims are entitled by law to Injunction and damages if the plaintiff is not a public figure AND “the publication was made in the knowledge that the recording or image was a digital imitation, or the publisher failed to take appropriate remedial action within 21 days of becoming aware that the recording or image was a digital imitation.”

The standard of proof required for actions under this Act is clear and convincing evidence for preliminary relief and a preponderance of the evidence for permanent relief.

Please note that this law was enacted as an emergency measure and is therefore already in effect. Emergency laws in Arizona take effect when signed by the governor.

Click here to view the full text.

Join me on the Law Conference of Champions – Presented by Troutman Amin, LLP to learn more about these new AI laws.