News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:AI Art Panic by aidenn0 on Friday November 25, 2022 @08:18PM (#33748856)
I'm not sure this is true; it addresses a case, which means the interpretation already is ex-post-facto. I don't know the answer, but it wouldn't surprise me if, in states with anti-abortion laws standing for which the statute of limitations has not expired, abortion providers could be held legally liable.
Re:AI Art Panic by fritztastic on Friday November 25, 2022 @08:44PM (#33749011)
Ex post facto laws are forbidden by the US Constitution, both at federal and state levels. [1]

At least, at this time, with current interpretation- "the Supreme Court has explained that people must have notice of the possible criminal penalties for their actions at the time they act" [2] (See also Weaver v Graham[3])

This might be subject to change.

[1]https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S9-C3-3-...

[2]https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S9-C3-3-...

[3]http://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep450/usrep450024/usr...

Re:AI Art Panic by aidenn0 on Friday November 25, 2022 @09:42PM (#33749350)
The laws are not ex post facto. They have been on the books, on some cases for over 100 years. States were not enforcing them, because they believed they were constitutionally prohibited from doing so.