Stop Non-Consensual Intimate Image Sharing

Summary#

This bill updates Nova Scotia’s Intimate Images and Cyber-protection Act to cover fake or AI-made sexual images (“deepfakes”) and to strengthen consent rules. It lets people pull back consent after sharing and requires the original sharer to try to take the image down. It also makes it easier to get court orders to stop the spread of intimate images.

• Adds a clear definition of “fake intimate image,” including AI- or software-created sexual images that look real.
• Treats fake intimate images the same as real ones under the law.
• Lets someone revoke consent to share an intimate image and requires the person who shared it to make every reasonable effort to remove it.
• Allows court orders to stop sharing even if the person in the image is not identifiable to others from the image itself.
• In cases about sharing a real intimate image without consent, puts the burden on the person who shared it to prove there was no reasonable expectation of privacy.

What it means for you#

• Individuals depicted in images

  • You can seek a court order to stop someone from sharing an intimate image of you, whether it is real or a convincing fake.
  • You can ask for removal even if your face or name is not visible in the image.
  • If you once agreed to share an intimate image but later change your mind, the person who shared it must make every reasonable effort to take it down. If they do not, you can sue for harm caused by that failure.

• People who share or forward images

  • If the person in the image revokes consent, you must try to remove the image wherever you shared it (for example, delete posts, contact sites, and stop further sharing).
  • If you share someone’s intimate image without clear consent, you can face a court order to stop and other civil consequences.
  • In a dispute about a real image shared without consent, you must show there was no reasonable expectation of privacy when it was made or shared.

• Parents, teens, and schools

  • Teens targeted by intimate images or deepfakes can seek quick court orders to stop the spread.
  • The law underscores: do not create, edit, or forward intimate images of others.

• Social media platforms, websites, and search engines

  • You may receive court orders to remove or block access to intimate images, including deepfakes.
  • Strong, fast take-down processes will be important to show “reasonable efforts” have been made.

Expenses#

No publicly available information.

Proponents' View#

• Updates the law for the age of AI by clearly covering deepfakes that look real.
• Gives people ongoing control over their intimate images by allowing consent to be revoked.
• Reduces hurdles for victims by not forcing them to prove they were identifiable from the image alone.
• Speeds up relief: shifting the burden to the person who shared a real image makes it easier to stop harmful sharing.
• Encourages quick removal by creating a duty to make reasonable efforts or face damages.

Opponents' View#

• Key phrases like “reasonably convincing” and “every reasonable effort” may be vague, creating uncertainty about what is allowed and what is enough to comply.
• Fully removing content from the internet can be very hard; people may face lawsuits even after trying in good faith.
• Putting the burden of proof on the person who shared a real image could be seen as unfair in close cases, or invite misuse.
• Allowing orders when the person is not identifiable from the image could lead to mistaken take-downs.
• Platforms outside the province may not comply, so results could be uneven and create false expectations for victims.