United Microelectronics Corp founder Robert Tsao (曹興誠) was the target of the distribution of what appeared to be intimate images. Tsao responded by saying he would pursue legal action against the distributors. Intimate images generated using artificial intelligence (AI) are more than a civil rights issue, regardless of whether the perpetrator is the image creator or a distributor.
In 2020, Chu Yu-chen (朱玉宸), also known as Xiaoyu (小玉) on YouTube, created deepfake videos that superimposed women’s faces onto existing pornographic videos and sold them for a profit of more than NT$10 million (US$305,390). Despite more than 100 people coming forward as victims of his creation, and the distribution and sale of the videos, Chu was only found guilty of contravening the Personal Data Protection Act (個人資料保護法) and was handed a prison sentence of just five and a half years.
That sentencing led to questions about the leniency of the Criminal Code, and revealed the helplessness and aggravation of criminal law when grappling with issues of new technological crimes.
To resolve that legal gap, lawmakers in 2023 criminalized deepfake images and added specific language for crimes that infringed upon sexual privacy and fake sexual images, effectively deterring much of the creation and distribution of such content.
Today, if one attempts to distribute or de facto unlawfully distributes, transmits, delivers or otherwise publicly displays such imagery — or uses other methods or similar technological techniques to create fake sexual images of others — and causes damage to the party being depicted, Article 319-4, Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code could be used to hand the perpetrator a sentence of up to five years imprisonment, detain them or be combined with a monetary fine of up to NT$500,000.
Even if a perpetrator is not the creator of the AI-generated sexual imagery, if they distribute, transmit, deliver or publicly display such images, and cause damage to the party being depicted in the imagery, Paragraph 2 of the same article could be used to hand similar penalties and punishments. If the perpetrator is intent on profiting from such imagery, then Paragraph 3 of the same article could be used to imprison the perpetrator for up to seven years, which can be combined with a monetary fine of up to NT$700,000.
None of these punishments are considered light. The legal rights and interests being protected from such crimes show that it is not simply an infringement of a person’s reputation, privacy and other conventional personal rights, but also an infringement on the right to agency regarding one’s own personal data in an era of new and evolving technologies. Thus, lawmakers do not define that kind of criminal act as Antragsdelikt, or “no trial without complaint” — in other words, prosecutors are empowered by Article 228, Paragraph 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (刑事訴訟法) to initiate a criminal investigation regardless of whether the infringed party has filed suit.
Using technological means to generate sexual images has only become easier with increasingly powerful AI. It is far easier to distribute such imagery online and even harder to remove it — even with the passage of time. That could cause long-term physical and emotional torment and suffering for people who fall victim to such crimes.
As such, with the addition of that and other acts into the Criminal Code, society cannot take it and other similar incidents lightly, regardless of the person’s financial or socio-political background.
Wu Ching-chin is an associate professor and chair of the Department of Law at Aletheia University.
Translated by Tim Smith
I came to Taiwan to pursue my degree thinking that Taiwanese are “friendly,” but I was welcomed by Taiwanese classmates laughing at my friend’s name, Maria (瑪莉亞). At the time, I could not understand why they were mocking the name of Jesus’ mother. Later, I learned that “Maria” had become a stereotype — a shorthand for Filipino migrant workers. That was because many Filipino women in Taiwan, especially those who became house helpers, happen to have that name. With the rapidly increasing number of foreigners coming to Taiwan to work or study, more Taiwanese are interacting, socializing and forming relationships with
Chinese social media influencer “Yaya in Taiwan” (亞亞在台灣), whose real name is Liu Zhenya (劉振亞), made statements advocating for “reunifying Taiwan [with China] through military force.” After verifying that Liu did indeed make such statements, the National Immigration Agency revoked her dependency-based residency permit. She must now either leave the country voluntarily or be deported. Operating your own page and becoming an influencer require a certain amount of support and user traffic. You must successfully gain approval for your views and attract an audience. Although Liu must leave the country, I cannot help but wonder how many more “Yayas” are still
Earlier signs suggest that US President Donald Trump’s policy on Taiwan is set to move in a more resolute direction, as his administration begins to take a tougher approach toward America’s main challenger at the global level, China. Despite its deepening economic woes, China continues to flex its muscles, including conducting provocative military drills off Taiwan, Australia and Vietnam recently. A recent Trump-signed memorandum on America’s investment policy was more about the China threat than about anything else. Singling out the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as a foreign adversary directing investments in American companies to obtain cutting-edge technologies, it said
The recent termination of Tibetan-language broadcasts by Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) is a significant setback for Tibetans both in Tibet and across the global diaspora. The broadcasts have long served as a vital lifeline, providing uncensored news, cultural preservation and a sense of connection for a community often isolated by geopolitical realities. For Tibetans living under Chinese rule, access to independent information is severely restricted. The Chinese government tightly controls media and censors content that challenges its narrative. VOA and RFA broadcasts have been among the few sources of uncensored news available to Tibetans, offering insights
RSS