Washington state judge blocks use of AI-enhanced video as evidence in possible first-of-its-kind ruling
Washington state judge blocks use of AI-enhanced video as evidence in possible first-of-its-kind ruling
Lawyers for a man charged with murder in a triple homicide had sought to introduce cellphone video enhanced by machine-learning software.
Lawyers for a man charged with murder in a triple homicide had sought to introduce cellphone video enhanced by machine-learning software.
A Washington state judge overseeing a triple murder case barred the use of video enhanced by artificial intelligence as evidence in a ruling that experts said may be the first-of-its-kind in a United States criminal court.
The ruling, signed Friday by King County Superior Court Judge Leroy McCullogh and first reported by NBC News, described the technology as novel and said it relies on "opaque methods to represent what the AI model 'thinks' should be shown."
"This Court finds that admission of this Al-enhanced evidence would lead to a confusion of the issues and a muddling of eyewitness testimony, and could lead to a time-consuming trial within a trial about the non-peer-reviewable-process used by the AI model," the judge wrote in the ruling that was posted to the docket Monday.
The ruling comes as artificial intelligence and its uses — including the proliferation of deepfakes on social media and in political campaigns — quickly evolve, and as state and federal lawmakers grapple with the potential dangers posed by the technology.
You're viewing a single thread.
Edit: my comment isn't about exactly the same thing, but ..
Some new camera tech might be opening a can of worms about whether what's pictured can be taken literally.
There was a story late last year of a woman trying on a wedding dress in front of two mirrors and someone snapped a photo.
When they looked at it, the reflection on the left mirror had a different pose to the reflection on The right mirror.
And this cast doubt on what exactly was going on the moment the shutter was pressed.
It looks like the camera had one of the stitch together the best photo of the people pictured (e.g. don't show shots of people blinking etc) and it treated the mirror images as different people.
I mean, yeah but in that everything that happened was real, and happen within a second probably at most of eachother. Still definitely permissible. AI is a very different story.
My info may be out of date but last I knew you could not use any edited photographic evidence in court, done by ai or not, in the US.