Facts
Between 15 November 2022 and May 2023 the respondent uploaded 12 non-consensual intimate deepfake images of six people ordinarily resident in Australia to a website that aggregates such content. Under the agreed facts he made each image the same way: he found a photograph of the person online, uploaded it to a webpage that generated semi-naked or naked images, and saved the result. On 5 May 2023 the eSafety Commissioner served a removal notice and a remedial direction; he refused to comply and went on posting images after the notice. After his arrest in October 2023 he helped remove the images. The Commissioner sued on 19 October 2023, and he admitted liability.
Question
As the respondent admitted the contraventions, the main task was to fix penalties under the Online Safety Act 2021: section 75, which bars posting non-consensual intimate images, and sections 80 and 83(3), which require compliance with a removal notice and a remedial direction. The Commissioner said this was the first proceeding seeking a civil penalty under the Act. The court had to decide whether the conduct was a single course of conduct or a series of contraventions, and to weigh deterrence, aggravating and mitigating factors and the respondent's means. The maximums were AUD 1,517,500 for the section 75 contraventions and AUD 26,323,500 each for sections 80 and 83(3).
Decision
On 26 September 2025 Longbottom J declared that the respondent had contravened section 75 on 12 occasions and had also contravened sections 80 and 83(3). Penalties for each post ranged from AUD 15,000 to AUD 35,000, the highest applying to posts made after the removal notice, with a further AUD 20,000 each for failing to comply with the notice and the direction. The total was AUD 343,500, and the respondent was ordered to pay costs. The court said the declarations also serve as a public warning that posting non-consensual intimate images is a serious matter. It anonymised the name of the website in its reasons and declarations so as not to publicise sites of this kind.
Why it matters
It was reported as the first penalty imposed in Australia for posting non-consensual deepfakes. The judgment shows that fake intimate images generated with AI tools can be dealt with through the same regulator complaint, removal notice and civil penalty scheme that applies to genuine images. The separate penalties for ignoring the removal notice and direction show that disregarding the regulator's notices adds its own liability. In assessing harm, the court also relied on a law professor's report filed by the Commissioner, which found no difference in harm between real and deepfake sexual images.
Related stages
In the same proceeding the respondent had earlier been dealt with for contempt in December 2023 for breaching court orders ([2023] FCA 1590). No appeal against the penalty judgment was found. eSafety's list of proceedings (last updated 29 July 2026) still shows the matter as 'Currently before the Court' and does not list the 2025 judgment.