8th May 2023
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
- We're going to need default hard budget caps on pretty much everything - 3rd October 2026
- OpenAI DevDay 2026 live blog - 29th September 2026
- 2026 in LLMs (so far) - 27th September 2026