Deepfakes can imitate real people through synthetic video, images, and audio. The tools range from face-swapping applications to voice-cloning and real-time voice-modulation platforms. Understanding how they operate can help lawyers identify when closer examination may be needed.
Produced in partnership with Albert Wan of Denis Chang’s Chambers, the complimentary Practice Note What lawyers need to know about Deepfake technology introduces the creation tools behind synthetic and altered media. It helps practitioners build technological awareness when video, images, or audio become relevant to a legal matter.
The issue can arise in disputes and investigations, as well as when advising clients who receive, rely on, or produce digital media. A video may appear to capture an important exchange, or a voice recording may seem to confirm who said what. An initial impression may provide an inadequate basis for assessing authenticity.
What makes deepfake material difficult to assess?
The Practice Note describes a deepfake as manipulated media that convincingly mimics real people and events. It commonly involves video, images, or audio edited or manufactured using artificial intelligence.
Lawyers already know how forged documents, unreliable testimony, and other falsified material can affect a matter. Synthetic media adds another layer because AI models can produce convincing visual or audio results.
The source also points to a practical reason for understanding the technology itself. References to a platform may appear in a file extension, an email, browser history, or the applications stored on a device. Recognising those names and categories can help lawyers see where further factual or technical enquiries may be appropriate.
Which tools can create or alter video and images?
The available tools support several different forms of synthetic or altered media. Some generate videos from text using digital avatars. Others swap faces in existing footage, transform a person’s appearance, or create a live impersonation from a single image.
This range matters because the relevant question may extend beyond whether an entire video was fabricated. A lawyer may need to consider whether an identity, appearance, or particular visual feature has been changed. Tools that can operate through video-conferencing platforms also raise questions when interactions take place remotely.
The Practice Note introduces examples across synthetic video, face swapping, image alteration, and live impersonation. This helps practitioners recognise the types of technology that could become relevant to enquiries about digital media.
How can synthetic audio enter legal work?
Voice-cloning platforms can generate synthetic speech from recordings of an original speaker, while real-time modulation tools can alter a voice during a live audio stream. These capabilities can affect how practitioners approach voice notes, calls, remote meetings, and other recorded or live communications.
The Practice Note observes that many creation tools are marketed as easy to use. It also cautions lawyers to remain alert to deepfake material offered by their own clients. That point makes the issue part of evidence intake and matter management, as well as a question about material produced by another party.
Where can lawyers find further practical support?
The Technology, Media & Telecommunications (TMT) module of Lexis+ Hong Kong Practical Guidance provides practical support across technology, data, digital media, cybersecurity, and AI governance.
Lexis+ with Protégé can also support legal research, document analysis, summarisation, and drafting as practitioners work through complex materials, while keeping legal judgement with the practitioner.
Complete the form below to download What lawyers need to know about Deepfake technology.
Note: After completing the form, the download will appear on the same page. Please stay on the page after submission. If you do not see the download, contact us at marketing.hk@lexisnexis.com for assistance.