論以深度偽造（deepfake）技術製造性私密影像是否受憲法思想自由之保障──以我國近期刑法修正草案為對象

Whether Using Deepfake Technology to Creating a Sexual Private Video Is Protected by the Constitutional Right to Freedom of Thought: A Study of the Recent Amended Drafts of Taiwan Penal Law

深度偽造（deepfake）技術係指將影像等中之人物的特定部位，主要是臉孔，利用人工智慧、機器深度學習等科技方式解碼、編碼、置換與合成，形成肉眼無從分辨、幾可亂真之成果。深偽技術可運用於製造各種影像，但自2017年起，網路上開始流傳以名人為對象之深偽性私密影像，因此立法院自2021年11月起，有不少版本之刑法修正草案提出。各草案為防止深偽性私密影像散布，均處罰散布前之「製造」行為。不過，製造深偽性私密影像，這樣具有外在行為或物品的情形，是否就當然不受憲法「思想自由」（freedom of thought）的保障？蓋人民單純地在腦袋裡思想，當然受憲法思想自由保障，政府無權干預人民心中究竟如何思想，即便這樣的思想是虛偽的、墮落的或下流的。亦即人民的「性幻想」（sexual fantasy），當然受憲法思想自由保障，毋庸辭費。然而，當人民藉由新興科技技術輔助、具現性幻想，例如深偽技術，是否因為具有外在行為或物品，以致於就無法獲得憲法思想自由之保障？對於此等既非對外表意行為，亦非腦中憑空幻想，類型可謂介於兩者之間的外在行為或物品，本文認為仍然應該受到憲法思想自由之保障，縱然為保護臉孔被盜用者之肖像權及名譽權，衡酌比例原則，對於無散布意圖或未致生損害之製造行為，立法新增或加重處罰，恐怕將無法通過憲法的檢驗。

The “deepfake” technology uses the methods like artificial intelligence, machine deep learning etc. to decode, recode, replace, and merge particular parts of a person in an existing video, usually face-swapping, to generating a new video that appears like the real thing. The deepfake technology can be used to create any form of videos. Since 2017, several porn or sexual private deepfake videos of celebrities have been distributed on the internet. To deal with this problem, the Legislative Yuan drafted several proposals to amend the Penal Code of Taiwan from November, 2022. In order to prevent the distribution of porn or sexual private deepfake videos, every proposal prohibits fabricating such videos. However, is fabricating deepfake videos, an external conduct, is presumably unprotected by the constitutional right to freedom of thought? Surely what people think in their brains is protected by the freedom of thought, with which the government has no authority to intervene, no matter how false, corrupt, or dirty the thought is. It naturally means that sexual fantasy shall be protected by the freedom of thought. However, when people’s sexual fantasy is supported or embodied by using new technology, like deepfake, does their desire becomes unprotected by the freedom of thought just because it involves an external conduct or some material in the real world? Making porn or sexual private videos is neither expressive speech nor pure thought in the brain. This article finds it falling into a category between them, and believes that it is also protected by the constitutional right to freedom of thought. Criminalizing or aggravating punishment of the fabricating conduct with no intent to distribute or causing no actual harms for the purpose of safeguarding the right of publicity and reputation of the one whose face was embezzled is nevertheless unconstitutional under the principle of proportionality.