This is an introductory episode where I introduce myself, Nomalanga Mashinini, and explain what the podcast is about.

The episode covers the definition of Image Rights with some examples of cases that have been decided for the protection of Image Rights.


Sources:

• Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996
• Cornelius S. “Commercial appropriation of a person’s image: Wells v Atoll Media (Pty) Ltd (Unreported 11961/2006) [2009] ZAWCHC 173 (9 November 2009)” (2011) 14 Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal 182-205
• Cele v Avusa Media Ltd [2013] 2 All SA 412
• Kumalo v Cycle Lab (Pty) Ltd [2011] JOL 27372 (GSJ)
• Neethling et al, Neethling on Personality Rights (LexisNexis 2019)
• W v Atoll Media (Pty) Ltd [2010] 4 All SA 548 (WCC)

In this episode, I consider how image rights are infringed in traditional marketing and assess how social media marketing might infringe on image rights.

References

• https://influencermarketinghub.com/influencer-marketing-agencies-south-africa/ accessed on 20 March 2021.
• McQuoid-Mason “Invasion of privacy: common law v constitutional delict – does it make a difference?” 2000 Acta Juridica 227-261.
• Neethling, Potgieter and Roos Neethling’s Personality Rights (2019) LexisNexis: Durban.
• Senthil, Saravanakumar and Deepa “On privacy and Security in Social Media – A Comprehensive Study” (2016) 78 Procedia Computer Science 114-119.

In this episode I reflect on how memes infringe peoples image rights and privacy. I delve into the legal issues that arise in the meme space and the boundaries for meme creation.

References

• https://www.buzzfeed.com/audreyworboys/famous-people-from-memes-then-now accessed on 21 March 2021.
• Neethling, Potgieter and Roos (2019) Neethling's Personality Rights LexisNexis: Durban.
• https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-mark-zuckerberg-privacy-vision-2019-4?IR=T accessed on 22 March 2021.
• https://advertising101.fandom.com/wiki/Meme_Advertising accessed on 2 April 2021.
• Cele v Avusa Media Ltd [2013] 2 All SA 412.
• Grütter v Lombard and Another 2007 (4) SA 89 (SCA); [2007] SCA 2 (RSA).
• Kumalo v Cycle Lab (Pty) Ltd [2011] JOL 27372 (GSJ).
• W v Atoll Media (Pty) Ltd [2010] 4 All SA 548 (WCC).

In this episode I discuss how deepfakes impact image rights.

References

• Cele v Avusa Media Ltd [2013] 2 All SA 412.
• Chesney & Citron, ‘21st century-style truth decay: Deepfakes and the challenge for privacy, free expression, and national security’, (2019) 78 Maryland Law Review 882.
• Farish, ‘Do deepfakes pose a golden opportunity? Considering whether English law should adopt California’s publicity right in the age of the deepfake’ (2020) 15(1) JIPLP 40.
• Ferraro, ‘Deepfake legislation: A nationwide survey – state and federal lawmakers consider legislation to regulate manipulated media’ (2019) WilmerHale, available at https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/deepfake-legislation-a-nationwide-86809/ accessed on 26 July 2020.
• Daily Maverick article on deepfakes by S Grootes
• https://www-dailymaverick-co-za.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2021-04-11-stop-believing-your-lying-eyes-deepfakes-are-coming-and-they-might-reshape-sas-politics/amp/ Accessed on 17 April 2021.
• Jordan Peele example of deepfakes using Former President of the United States of America, B Obama https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQ54GDm1eL0 accessed 24 April 2021.
• Le Roux v Dey (CCT 45/10) [2011] ZACC 4.
• Nick Cage Deepfakes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BU9YAHigNx8 accessed on 24 April 2021.

In this episode I discuss deepfakes regulation under the Cybercrimes Bill B6D-2017 in South Africa and the impact of deepfakes on Image Rights. This Bill was signed two days after this episode aired. The relevant law is now the Cybercrimes Act 19 of 2020.

Sources:

• Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (1996).
• Cybercrimes Bill B6D-2017.
• Citron, D.K. and Chesney, R. (2019) “Deep fakes: A looming challenge for privacy, democracy and national security”, California Law Review, Vol 107, pp 1753-1820.
• Citron, D.K. and Chesney, R. (2019) “21st century-style truth decay: Deepfakes and the challenge for privacy, free expression, and national security”, Maryland Law Review, Vol 78, pp 882-891.
• Farish, K. (2020) “Do deepfakes pose a golden opportunity? Considering whether English law should adopt California’s publicity right in the age of the deepfake”, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, Vol 15, No. 1, pp 40-48.
• Ferraro, M.F. (2019) “Deepfake legislation: A nationwide survey – state and federal lawmakers consider legislation to regulate manipulated media”, [online], WilmerHale https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/deepfake-legislation-a-nationwide-86809/.
• Kietzmann, J. et al. (2020) “Deepfakes: Trick or treat?”, Business Horizons, Vol 63, No. 2, pp 135 -136.

This episode is about the growing concern of using videos of homeless or destitute people to attract likes and follows on social media. I explain that regardless of social and economic status, everyone has image rights in South Africa.

Not expecting to see the words 'deepfakes' and 'good' in one title? Kelsey Farish, an attorney and deepfakes legal expert from DAC Beachcroft, tells us all about how deepfakes can do good in this episode. Check out her website http://kelseyfarish.com to learn more about deepfakes.