The LDPR faction, led by Leonid Slutsky, has submitted a bill to the State Duma that radically changes the rules for generative technologies. Deputies propose to legally enshrine the use of deepfakes as an aggravating circumstance in the commission of any crimes. The initiative seems logical against the backdrop of the rapid development of AI, but raises questions due to the party's own experiments with the same technologies.

What is the essence of the new rules?

The authors of the bill have thoroughly justified their position: video and audio materials generated by neural networks have become so realistic that they easily mislead people. Fraudsters actively use deepfakes to lend weight to their schemes, and it is becoming increasingly difficult for victims and law enforcement to prove facts and correctly classify violations.

The proposed norm covers two key scenarios:

Situation of norm application Description of the mechanism
Imitation of a real person Generated files reproduce the voice or actions of a real person that they did not perform
Creation of a fictional person Technologies model the image of a non-existent character for conducting illegal activities

Thanks to these changes, the judicial system will finally receive an adequate tool for working in the era of rapid technological development, allowing for a more precise differentiation of the degree of responsibility for criminals.

Political party and high technology

The legislative step by the LDPR attracts increased attention due to the party's own prominent IT projects. At one of the economic forums in St. Petersburg, party members presented a unique digital algorithm—a special neural network named after the deceased founder of the party, Vladimir Zhirinovsky.

The program is capable of formulating quite logical answers, imitating the manner of the famous politician. The virtual double was trained on a vast array of archival letters, interviews, and public speeches. Developers emphasize the memorial nature of this project, created exclusively with the consent of the leadership.

Here, a completely different context is evident, distinct from criminal schemes involving identity forgery. However, the very fact of the party members' close work with recreating a human likeness adds additional weight to the discussion. Party activists promote this image among the youth audience as well.

There are other initiatives. For example, one deputy proposed issuing a commemorative memecoin, following a similar project by Donald Trump. This only confirms that the LDPR is actively mastering all facets of the digital economy, including cryptocurrencies and NFTs.

Expert comment: The paradoxical nature of the situation is obvious: a party that created its own deepfake for memorial purposes now demands criminal liability for the same technologies. From a professional standpoint, this is the right step—regulation of deepfakes is overdue. But lawmakers will have to clearly define the line between legitimate use of AI (as in the case of virtual Zhirinovsky) and criminal schemes. Otherwise, we risk getting a law that will work selectively.