{"id":20971,"date":"2025-10-18T01:50:42","date_gmt":"2025-10-18T04:50:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lantyer.com.br\/?p=20971"},"modified":"2025-10-18T01:53:03","modified_gmt":"2025-10-18T04:53:03","slug":"law-15-123-2025-deepfake-psychological-violence","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lantyer.com.br\/en\/law-15-123-2025-deepfake-psychological-violence\/","title":{"rendered":"Law 15.123\/2025 and deepfake: a new milestone in psychological violence with AI"},"content":{"rendered":"

Law No. 15,123\/2025<\/strong>, Brazil created cause for increased sentence<\/strong> in psychological violence against women when the crime is committed with AI or technological resources that alter image\/voice<\/strong>. It is a legal step that connects criminal law, technological evidence and algorithmic liability<\/strong>, and which demands new routines for legal practice. Artificial intelligence has become the invisible "grammar" of our age\u2014and with it, sophisticated ways of violating dignity have emerged: when a face, a voice, or an image are fabricated to humiliate. With <\/p>\n\n\n\n

What exactly has changed in the law<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Text and scope.<\/strong> Law 15.123\/2025 changed the art. 147-B of the Penal Code<\/strong> to aggravate in half<\/strong> the penalty (imprisonment of 6 months to 2 years and a fine) when psychological violence against women is practiced with IA<\/strong> or any technological resource<\/strong> that changes image or sound<\/strong> of the victim (e.g.: deepfakes<\/strong>). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Legislative motivation.<\/strong> The sanction was highlighted by the Executive and Congress as a response to the escalation of digital humiliation<\/strong> and coercion<\/strong> through synthetic content<\/strong> (audio, image and video). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

In summary:<\/strong> if psychological aggression uses AI to manufacture\/alter the victim's media, the penalty increases<\/strong>. The qualifier applies on the crime of art. 147-B<\/strong>, does not create an autonomous criminal type.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\"Law<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Intersection with Digital Law and LGPD<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Personal data and synthetic content.<\/strong> The production of deepfakes often involves collection and processing of personal data<\/strong> (images, voice), attracting the regime of LGPD<\/strong> (legal bases, purpose, security). In this context, controllers<\/strong> and operators<\/strong> can answer civil-administratively<\/strong> for illicit treatment, independently<\/strong> from the criminal sphere. (See also sectoral privacy\/AI analyses that contextualize risks and good practices). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Chain accountability.<\/strong> In addition to the material author<\/strong> of deepfake, the responsibility of platforms<\/strong> (hosting\/sharing) \u2014 especially when there is failure to comply with moderation duties<\/strong> and court orders<\/strong>. Interpretation must preserve the freedom of expression<\/strong> and due process<\/strong> for removals, but without shielding repeated abuses<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Evidence, expertise and digital chain of custody<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Forensic challenges.<\/strong> The distinction between authentic media<\/strong> and synthetic media<\/strong> requires specialized expertise<\/strong> (analysis of compression inconsistencies, generation artifacts, origin\/metadata verification). The party's actions should prioritize:<\/p>\n\n\n\n