Deepfakes are triggering a legal hardening

2026 is exposing how quickly AI misuse becomes a public safety issue.

Article link: https://open.substack.com/pub/johanosteyn/p/deepfakes-are-triggering-a-legal?r=73gqa&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true

Audio summary: https://youtu.be/PDzeV1E2YJE

Follow me on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/johanosteyn/

Deepfakes used to feel like a niche internet problem: a few viral clips, some celebrity hoaxes, the occasional scam. That era is over. In 2026, synthetic media had become cheap, fast, and convincing enough to cause real harm at scale. We are seeing the shift from novelty to weaponisation, and the consequences are not only reputational. They are psychological, financial, and in some cases, physically dangerous.

When a tool can fabricate a person’s voice, face, or identity convincingly, it becomes a public safety issue, not just a tech issue. That is why we are seeing what I call a legal hardening: governments moving from abstract “AI ethics” conversations to concrete criminal offences, enforcement powers, and tougher penalties.

CONTEXT AND BACKGROUND

Laws move slowly. Technology moves quickly. For years, policymakers responded to deepfakes with broad statements about misinformation, privacy, and harm. Meanwhile, the tools improved and spread. What was once the domain of skilled creators is now accessible through apps and prompts.

Two developments accelerated the pressure on legal systems. The first is credibility. Deepfakes are no longer obviously fake. The second is distribution. Synthetic content travels at the speed of social media, and platforms remain inconsistent in how they detect, label, or remove it.

The result is a widening gap between what the technology enables and what society can handle. The most sensitive harms sit where law is typically most cautious: sexual exploitation, child safety, election manipulation, and fraud. When those harms become common, the demand for legal action becomes unavoidable.

INSIGHT AND ANALYSIS

The first driver of legal hardening is that deepfakes collapse the cost of abuse. It used to take time, skill, and coordination to create a believable impersonation. Now it can be done quickly, repeatedly, and anonymously. That changes behaviour. It enables harassment campaigns, revenge content, extortion, and workplace sabotage at a scale that overwhelms traditional responses.

The second driver is the rise of “nudification” and non-consensual intimate imagery. This is one of the most disturbing uses because it targets ordinary people, including teenagers, and it is often used for bullying and coercion. Once images spread, the harm is hard to reverse. The law is being forced to treat this as a serious offence rather than “online drama”, because the psychological impact and long-term consequences can be severe.

The third driver is fraud. Synthetic voice in particular is becoming a powerful tool for social engineering. A convincing voice message from a “CEO”, a “bank”, or a “family member” can trigger actions before a person has time to verify. Deepfakes exploit the human tendency to trust familiar cues.

The fourth driver is trust decay. Even when a deepfake is not used, the mere existence of deepfakes creates plausible deniability. People can claim real evidence is fake, or dismiss authentic footage as manipulated. This corrodes accountability in politics, business, and everyday disputes.

So legal hardening is not only about punishing misuse. It is also about preserving the basic ability of society to agree on what is real enough to act on.

IMPLICATIONS

For policymakers, the challenge is to legislate with precision. Overbroad laws risk chilling legitimate satire, art, and journalism. But vague laws fail victims. The most practical approach is to focus on harms and intent: non-consensual intimate imagery, impersonation for fraud, harassment, and synthetic content used to incite violence or manipulate elections.

For platforms, “policy statements” are not enough. The public is increasingly demanding measurable commitments: stronger detection, clearer labelling, faster takedowns, and cooperation with law enforcement. This is especially important for child safety, where delays can be devastating.

For organisations, deepfakes should now be treated as a security risk.

Verification protocols must become routine: call-backs for payment requests, multi-step approval for sensitive actions, and training staff to recognise manipulation. In an AI world, your procedures are part of your defence.

For parents and educators, media literacy is no longer optional. Children need practical skills: how to verify, how to report, and how to seek help. Adults must understand that shame and fear are often what deepfake abusers rely on.

CLOSING TAKEAWAY

The legal hardening around deepfakes is a sign that society has reached a threshold. When synthetic media becomes a tool for coercion, fraud, and bullying at scale, it is no longer a debate about innovation. It is a debate about safety and dignity. In 2026, we are learning that trust is an infrastructure, and deepfakes attack that infrastructure directly. The path forward is not panic, but precision: clear laws focused on harm, stronger platform accountability, and everyday verification habits that help ordinary people navigate a world where seeing and hearing is no longer believing.

Author Bio: Johan Steyn is a prominent AI thought leader, speaker, and author with a deep understanding of artificial intelligence’s impact on business and society. He is passionate about ethical AI development and its role in shaping a better future. Find out more about Johan’s work at https://www.aiforbusiness.net