ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2026
Deepfake-induced harm and AI accountability: a layered civil-liability framework for generative models, platforms, and digital identity.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Deepfake and other synthetic-media harms create a civil-liability problem that ordinary tort doctrine does not easily resolve: harmful content may be generated, amplified, monetised, and redistributed through a chain of actors in which no single participant controls the whole causal process. The objective of this article is to develop a layered civil-liability framework for that problem. It examines the Saudi and Jordanian civil-liability regimes as the principal doctrinal focus, while using selected EU, US, UAE, and Chinese materials as comparative reference points. The article remains private-law centred. It asks how civil-liability doctrine can respond when reputational, identity-based, corporate, and non-material harm is produced through the combined conduct of generative-model developers, prompting users, online platforms, and secondary distributors. The analysis identifies three pressure points: the natural-person wording of Article 138(2) of the Saudi Civil Transactions Law, which narrows moral-harm protection in relation to corporate and institutional injury; the persistence of a single-wrongdoer model in Saudi and Jordanian doctrine, despite the layered actor structure of deepfake production; and the evidential asymmetry created by opaque algorithmic causation. The article's main contribution is a calibrated model of layered civil liability: clearer protection for juridical-person reputation, a custody-based rule for algorithmic systems, cautious burden shifting where relevant information is controlled by platforms or developers, stronger private-law links to data-protection regimes, and targeted transparency duties for synthetic-media systems. The contribution is not to replace civil law with AI regulation, but to show how both fields must work together if deepfake-induced harm is to be remedied in a legally coherent way.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.