Using AI to deepfake porn (probably) dead actresses from the 1970s and then boasting that the material was “innocent” back then, has resulted in quite a backlash – who could have predicted this??
Well, I certainly did. Earlier this week, I highlighted the showcasing at the Cannes Film Festival of a Norwegian company’s AI “vintage” porn movie that made use of photographs from 1970s erotic magazines. Whilst no doubt technically impressive and a noteworthy development in sex tech, I did wonder whether either they or the Swedish website “Cultpix” who are distributing it, had actually established whether any of the actors and actresses were still alive, and sought consent from any who were. It appears that they didn’t, and quite a few people are upset about this. This seems to have caught Cultpix by surprise, as Futurism reports:
If the goal was to be this Cannes season’s cause célèbre, it’s working. Uproar erupted on social media blasting the use of the technology and the ethical violations it raised around consent, which seemed to be a question that the filmmakers barely even considered.
“Statistically at least a few of these models have passed on by now which basically means they’re using AI to reanimate the bodies/images of dead women to make nonconsensual porn of them,” fumed one commentator on Bluesky. “Whatever explanation they’re f*cking giving for it is just them jerking themselves off some more.”
“Personally, I think using AI to simulate porn of people who didn’t consent to you is a vile, horrific crime!” another wrote on X.
What makes this apparent blindness to the anger it would provoke even more astonishing is that Cultpix seemingly thought they were highlighting how vintage erotica that was considered risqué in the 70s, appears relatively innocent today.
“We want to use the latest technology to stimulate a discussion about attitudes to images that are now half a century old,” Cultpix CEO Rickard Gramfors said told Variety. “What was once considered shocking ‘adult’ material now seems remarkably innocent by today’s standards.”
Furthermore, Cultpix is based in Sweden – a country that now makes the purient feminist attitude towards the adult industry in Britain look almost liberal in comparison. It’s hard to believe that Cultpix didn’t know that their film at Cannes would attract some controversy and backlash. I’m tempted to say that they knew full well what they were getting into it and are relishing the publicity. But having followed the adult industry closely for 20 years, I can honestly say that it’s equally possible that they really are that naieve.
Perhaps though, Cultpix do know what they are doing. Despite Sweden being at the forefront of anti-porn industry legislation, and last year making it illegal to purchase custom OnlyFans content or to pay to watch live cam girls, the country has been surprisingly slow to legislate against deepfake porn. In the meantime, traffic to Cultpix.com must be soaring, and the company themselves are doubling down. In response to a critic on X.com, their official channel posted:
It’s an experiment. We want to see what people think, positive and negative. Also, is it ‘fappable’? The ultimate test is whether people watch it on Cultpix. So far, nobody has written to say that they are cancelling their membership. It will be interesting to see viewing stats.
