Australian Federal Court orders man to pay A$343,500 for posting AI-generated deepfake intimate images of six women, in eSafety's first civil penalty case

The images. According to the agreed facts and admissions that the Federal Court accepted as true, between 15 November 2022 and 27 May 2023 the respondent posted 12 deepfake intimate images, described as moving visual images, of six people ordinarily resident in Australia to a website that hosts deepfakes and is accessible worldwide. He made each by locating an image of the person online, uploading it to a webpage that allowed him to create semi-naked or naked images of the person, and saving the generated image. None of the six consented. (The judgment's introduction gives 19 May 2023 as the end of the posting period; its agreed facts and penalty orders include an image posted on 27 May 2023.) ABC, The Guardian and Information Age describe the six as prominent Australian women; their names are suppressed.

The removal notice. eSafety sent him a removal notice and a remedial direction on 5 May 2023 concerning the first two images. He replied that the notice meant nothing to him because he was not a resident of Australia, did not comply, and did not comply with two infringement notices that followed. He admitted that some images posted after the notice were retaliation against people involved in issuing it. He was arrested by Queensland police on 27 October 2023 on other matters, and from about 3 November 2023 he gave eSafety his log-in details so its investigators could remove the images. The first two had remained online for almost a year. ABC and Information Age report that he was fined A$25,000 for contempt in December 2023 after admitting that he breached three orders, including by forwarding the orders to eSafety staff and 49 other email addresses, including media outlets.

The harm. Each of the six complained to eSafety, on her own behalf or through an authorised person. The women gave no evidence about the extent of their loss. The court quoted one complaint: the woman said she was horrified and, although it was clearly a fake video, felt violated, vulnerable and without agency. The court found the posts were likely to have caused the women hurt and distress, likely made worse for the first two by the year the images stayed online. When arrested he acknowledged the images could cause upset and distress, but he called making deepfakes a hobby and fun.

The ruling. On 26 September 2025 Justice Longbottom found the contraventions serious, deliberate and sustained and ordered penalties totalling A$343,500 plus part of the Commissioner's costs. The Commissioner said it was the first proceeding to impose a civil penalty under the Act. The eSafety Commissioner, quoted by Information Age, called this kind of deepfake abuse a misuse of easily accessible AI tools.

A separate case. ABC reported on 2 September 2026 that a Brisbane jury had convicted the same man of 17 offences over photos of women and girls, including students and staff of a Brisbane private school, that he digitally altered to look nude and emailed to the school and others in 2023, and that he had been sentenced to two years in jail, which he had already served. That proceeding is a different case; whether any of its victims are among the six women here is not established.

Limits. The judgment was read through an Internet Archive capture because the court's site refused the fetch. Neither the judgment nor the news reports names the web tool or describes how it generated the images.

According to the Federal Court's findings on admitted facts, six women were depicted without consent in generated deepfake intimate images posted online, two for almost a year, and the posts were likely to have caused them hurt and distress; one complainant said she felt violated, vulnerable and without agency.

Federal Court of Australia, eSafety Commissioner proceeding [2025] FCA 1191, 26 September 2025 (Longbottom J): declarations of 12 contraventions of s 75 of the Online Safety Act 2021 and of non-compliance with a removal notice (s 80) and a remedial direction (s 83(3)); penalties totalling A$343,500 and an order to pay part of the Commissioner's costs. ABC and Information Age report that in December 2023 he had been fined A$25,000 for contempt after admitting breaches of three orders in the case. No appeal from the penalty judgment is reported in the sources inspected. In a separate criminal proceeding, ABC reported on 2 September 2026 that a Brisbane jury had convicted him of 17 offences over altered images of women and girls, and that he had been sentenced to two years in jail, already served; that case is outside this record.