What Tesla is contending is deeply troubling to the Court. Their position is that because Mr. Musk is famous and might be more of a target for deep fakes, his public statements are immune. In other words, Mr. Musk, and others in his position, can simply say whatever they like in the public domain, then hide behind the potential for their recorded statements being a deep fake to avoid taking ownership of what they did actually say and do. The Court is unwilling to set such a precedent by condoning Tesla's approach here.
Recent articles
- Putting Gemini 2.5 Pro through its paces - 25th March 2025
- New audio models from OpenAI, but how much can we rely on them? - 20th March 2025
- Calling a wrap on my weeknotes - 20th March 2025