The UK’s new deepfake laws: what is now illegal, what it means in practice, and what could come next

17 February 2026

Paul Francis

Want your article or story on our site? Contact us here

Deepfakes have moved from a niche tech trick to something people can create on a phone in minutes. The UK is now tightening the law to deal with the most harmful uses, especially sexually explicit deepfakes made without consent. The headline is simple: the UK is moving from “it’s illegal to share” to “it’s illegal to make” in key scenarios.

Woman with closed eyes in dark setting, red geometric light pattern projected on her face, conveying a calm, futuristic mood.

What the law already covered (before the newest changes)

Before the current push, UK law already targeted intimate image abuse. Under changes made via the Online Safety Act, the Sexual Offences Act 2003 was updated to criminalise sharing or threatening to share an “intimate photograph or film” without consent, and that includes content that “appears to show” someone, which is where sexually explicit deepfakes fit.

So if someone made a sexually explicit deepfake and posted it, sent it, or threatened to leak it, there has already been a clear criminal route for prosecution.

What the UK is adding: making sexually explicit deepfakes illegal to create

The big gap that campaigners and MPs kept pointing to was this: sharing could be an offence, but creating a sexually explicit deepfake was not always directly captured.

The government has tabled changes to criminalise the intentional creation of sexually explicit deepfakes without consent, with tests around intent and consent. In plain English, if you generate a sexually explicit deepfake of a real adult without their consent, you are moving into criminal territory even if you do not publish it.

The government has also publicly stated that creators of sexually explicit deepfakes could face prosecution, and referenced sentences of up to two years as part of the package being pursued through forthcoming legislation.

The “caught out” part: how ordinary people can stumble into an offence

A lot of people hear “deepfake law” and think it only applies to hardcore offenders. The reality is that the new direction of travel raises risk for a wider group, because creation itself becomes the focus.

Common ways people could get caught out:

Using “nudify” or face swap apps on someone you knowIf the output is sexually explicit and the person did not consent, “it was a joke” is not a magic shield. The government has explicitly called out nudification style tools in its crackdown messaging.
Making it privately and never posting itThe whole point of the new creation offence is to cover scenarios where the harm occurs even if the image is never uploaded.
Commissioning or requesting someone else to generate itPeople often think liability stops with “the creator”. In practice, investigators look at who asked, who paid, who supplied images, and who directed the result. The policy intent is to clamp down on the behaviour end to end, not just the final upload.
Assuming “public photo” means “public permission”A selfie on Instagram is not consent for someone else to turn it into explicit material. The consent standard is central to both the sharing offence and the proposed creation offence.
Keeping it “semi private” in group chatsSharing to even a small group can still be sharing. If it spreads further, your risk rises fast because investigators can follow the distribution trail.

How enforcement can happen in the real world: digital forensics on phones and laptops, app logs, payment trails, cloud backups, chat exports, plus platform reports. Also, because platforms have stronger duties under the Online Safety Act, takedowns and reports can happen faster, which can also create evidence trails sooner.

How this could start affecting AI art and creators

Most people making AI art are not trying to abuse anyone, but the line gets blurry when AI art uses real faces, real bodies, or “looks exactly like” a real person.

Here is a practical way to think about it:

Lower risk AI art use

Fully fictional characters or clearly stylised outputs that do not map onto a real person
Licensed models, model releases, or explicit written consent
Editorial or educational demonstrations that use synthetic, non-identifiable faces

Higher risk AI art use

Photorealistic outputs that use a real person’s likeness, especially if sexualised
“Make my ex nude” style prompting, even if you never post it
“Parody” claims where the output is still explicit and identifiable

Even if a creator thinks they are making “art”, the law is increasingly focused on consent and harm, not the label on the output. The government’s stated intention is specifically about sexually explicit deepfakes without consent.

Good creator hygiene going forward (simple and realistic):

If it is a real person, get explicit consent, in writing if possible
Avoid sexualised likeness work entirely unless you are working with a consenting adult model under a clear agreement
Keep prompt records and consent records for commercial work
Consider watermarking or clear labelling for AI generated content where appropriate (this is not a legal shield, but it helps reduce deception risk)

What the Online Safety Act Really Means

The Online Safety Act is less about banning everything and more about forcing platforms to do risk management properly.

Two rollout dates matter:

17 March 2025: platforms have a legal duty to protect users from illegal content, aligned to Ofcom’s first codes of practice.
25 July 2025: platforms have a legal duty to protect children, including using “highly effective” age assurance for porn and other harmful content.

Ofcom is the regulator, and the enforcement toolkit is serious, including very large fines and, in extreme cases, service restriction.

What else is in the pipeline (and why people are watching closely)

The deepfake changes are not happening in isolation. The UK is also signalling broader moves under the Online Safety regime and related bills.

1) Bringing AI chatbots explicitly into scope

Following the Grok scandal, the government is moving to make sure AI chatbots are explicitly covered by Online Safety duties, so chatbot providers can be held accountable if they fail to prevent illegal harms.

2) Bigger child safety restrictions, including under-16 access debates

There is active discussion and consultation activity around restricting under-16 access to certain services and features, and even looking at VPN workarounds.

3) Stronger measures around self-harm content and safety-by-design

Parliamentary and regulatory pressure is pushing toward more proactive obligations, not just reacting after harm spreads. Ofcom’s codes and regulatory documents are already setting the direction of travel.

Why This Is the Right Move, With Caveats

I think criminalising non-consensual sexually explicit deepfakes is a good and necessary step. It targets real harm, closes an obvious loophole, and gives victims better protection.

At the same time, I am wary about what could be restricted next, especially if regulation expands in ways that accidentally sweep up legitimate creative work, commentary, satire, or benign AI art. The key will be whether future changes stay tightly focused on consent, harm, and clear illegal conduct, rather than drifting into broad controls on speech or creativity.

Current Most Read

Why You Should Not Trust Your Car’s Automatic Systems Completely

The Property Industry Is Going Remote — But Is It For The Better?

The Lost Legends of Cinema: Films That Never Came to Be

Connor Banks
Aug 12, 2024
3 min read

In the glittering world of Hollywood, not all dreams make it to the silver screen. Some projects, despite their enormous potential and the star-studded talent attached to them, remain forever in the realm of "what could have been." Among these are some of the most intriguing and ambitious films never made, each with its own unique story that has captivated the imaginations of fans and filmmakers alike. From Alejandro Jodorowsky’s psychedelic epic to George Miller’s ambitious superhero ensemble, these unproduced films offer a glimpse into alternate cinematic realities.

Jodorowsky's Dune: The Psychedelic Epic

Jodorowsky's Dune stands out as perhaps the most legendary of these unfinished projects. In the mid-1970s, avant-garde filmmaker Alejandro Jodorowsky embarked on an audacious quest to adapt Frank Herbert’s science fiction masterpiece, "Dune." His vision was nothing short of revolutionary, intending to create a 10-14 hour cinematic experience that would transcend traditional film and become a transformative journey for viewers. Jodorowsky assembled an extraordinary team, including surrealist artist Salvador Dalí, Orson Welles, Mick Jagger, and H.R. Giger, with a soundtrack by Pink Floyd. Despite the staggering talent and creativity involved, the project was ultimately deemed too ambitious and costly. Financial and logistical issues, combined with Hollywood's reluctance to back such an unconventional vision, led to its demise. The story of "Jodorowsky’s Dune" was later immortalised in a 2013 documentary, offering a fascinating look at what might have been and showcasing the profound influence it had on future science fiction films.

The Man Who Killed Don Quixote: A Dream Delayed

The Man Who Killed Don Quixote concept art piece

Equally compelling is Terry Gilliam’s "The Man Who Killed Don Quixote." Gilliam, known for his work with Monty Python and his uniquely surreal directorial style, spent nearly three decades attempting to bring this project to life. The film, a loose adaptation of Miguel de Cervantes’ classic novel, faced an extraordinary array of setbacks. The initial production in 2000 was plagued by natural disasters, financial issues, and a severe back injury suffered by lead actor Jean Rochefort. These calamities, captured in the documentary "Lost in La Mancha," halted the project, and subsequent attempts to revive it faced similar challenges. It wasn’t until 2018 that Gilliam finally completed the film, though it differed significantly from his original vision. The journey of "The Man Who Killed Don Quixote" remains a testament to artistic perseverance, highlighting the often tumultuous path from script to screen.

Atuk: The Cursed Comedy

"Atuk," based on Mordecai Richler’s novel "The Incomparable Atuk," has earned its place in Hollywood legend due to the so-called "Atuk curse." This comedy about an Inuit navigating the modern urban jungle was attached to several high-profile actors, each of whom died under tragic and unexpected circumstances before production could begin. John Belushi, Sam Kinison, John Candy, and Chris Farley all expressed interest or were cast in the lead role, only to meet untimely deaths. The eerie pattern of misfortune has led to a macabre fascination with the project, ensuring that "Atuk" remains one of the most infamous unproduced films in history.

Batman: Year One: The Dark Reimagining

Concept of Gotham City as seen from Above

In the realm of superhero cinema, Darren Aronofsky’s "Batman: Year One" represents a radical departure from the traditional portrayals of the Dark Knight. Aronofsky, known for his dark and psychologically intense films, envisioned a gritty reboot of Batman that would strip the character down to his essence. This version of Bruce Wayne would lose his fortune, live on the streets, and don a makeshift costume. Despite the intriguing premise, Warner Bros. ultimately chose a different path, opting for Christopher Nolan’s "Batman Begins," which balanced realism with a more traditional narrative. Aronofsky’s bold vision remains a fascinating "what if" scenario, reflecting the creative risks involved in reimagining iconic characters.

Justice League: Mortal: The Superhero Ensemble That Almost Was

Finally, George Miller’s "Justice League: Mortal" was an ambitious attempt to bring together DC Comics' most iconic superheroes in a single film long before the success of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. With a cast that included Armie Hammer as Batman, D.J. Cotrona as Superman, and Megan Gale as Wonder Woman, the project promised a sprawling, epic narrative. However, it was plagued by a series of setbacks, including the 2007-2008 Writers Guild of America strike, financial issues, and concerns over audience confusion due to multiple actors playing the same characters in different franchises. Despite never being made, "Justice League: Mortal" has become a source of endless speculation and interest, illustrating the complexities and challenges of launching a shared cinematic universe.

The Allure of the Unmade

These unproduced films, each with their unique blend of ambition, talent, and misfortune, offer a tantalising glimpse into the alternate realities of cinema. They stand as reminders of the fragile nature of filmmaking, where even the most promising projects can falter and fall into the realm of legend. Yet, their stories continue to inspire, serving as both cautionary tales and sources of endless fascination for those who dream of what might have been.