Using AI-enhanced images, videos of real persons may violate Data Privacy Act: NPC
The National Privacy Commission said using AI-enhanced images and videos based on a real person's face and likeness without lawful basis may violate a clause of the Data Privacy Act of 2012.
In a statement on Aug. 11, NPC reminded the public that "a person's face and likeness are personal information under Republic Act No. 10173" or the Data Privacy Act. Some photos and videos may even constitute biometric information that can directly identify an individual, according to the commission.
"Using AI tools to generate an image or video from a real person's face and likeness and posting or sharing the resulting image and/or video are forms of processing of personal data," continued the statement.
Therefore, per NPC, without a legitimate purpose provided under the DPA, these actions violate the law.
"The use of a person's face and likeness to create synthetic media without any lawful basis may amount to unauthorized processing under Section 25 of the DPA," wrote NPC.
Additionally, depending on the extent of the use, which includes posting and sharing the AI-generated media, it "may also constitute violations of the DPA's other penal provisions," the statement continued.
This does not cover only private individuals.
"These reminders apply with equal force to AI-generated media of public officials. Public officials are data subjects under the DPA," the statement read. Fabricating their images or videos adds no information about their official function so they are equally protected by the DPA, including their private family members, especially the minors.
"The Commission will treat complaints involving the likenesses of minors with utmost priority," the statement read.
Per NPC, violations of the DPA come with criminal penalties and possible civil and administrative liabilities, as well as from other laws.
Exceptions
According to the NPC, the DPA does not apply to the processing of a person's images and videos if they're used for journalistic, artistic, or literary purposes. The right to freedom of speech also protects the use of such synthetic media for satire, parody, commentary, and reporting on matters of public interest.
However, their protected use still depends on the circumstances surrounding each instance, including if the image was presented as authentic, if the AI enhancement is disclosed, and if it was actually necessary to use the person's photorealistic likeness for such a purpose.
What can a person do if their face were manipulated by AI and spread online?
They can demand that the person or organization that misused their likeness remove the media from their platform.
Additionally, the aggrieved person may file a complaint with the commission, which will then launch an investigation on the basis of the complaint or on its own initiative. During the investigation, NPC may send out compliance and/or cease-and-desist orders if necessary.
To ease the pathway of complaints, NPC expects online platforms to provide an accessible system for reporting and for the prompt removal of the media.
"The Commission reminds all persons who create, post, and/or share AI-generated synthetic media to respect the rights and dignity of individuals, and to act promptly and in good faith to remove such content upon lawful demand of the affected persons," it concluded.
