The Manhattan deepfake-domain seizure: verify the action without spreading abuse

What the announcement establishes

On September 14, the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office announced the seizure of 12 domains associated with the sale of nonconsensual AI-generated sexual deepfakes. The announcement describes an investigation and alleged conduct. It should not be presented as a conviction of an identified person or as evidence that every copy of the material has been removed.

Sources: Manhattan District Attorney’s Office: District Attorney’s domain-seizure announcement

Verify and document without redistributing

For a news check, the official statement is the appropriate starting point. There is no need to search for the seized sites or reproduce the people depicted. For an affected person’s report, keep the record proportionate to the receiving platform’s instructions and respect that person’s preferences about retention.

1. Record the official announcement URL and date. Identify the action described—such as a domain seizure—without silently substituting arrest, conviction or complete removal.
2. Keep claims attributed to the announcing office. If a later court record is relevant, verify it separately rather than treating an investigation announcement as the final outcome.
3. When reporting a harmful post, preserve its URL, account identifier, timestamp and platform report number. Do not repost the imagery to demonstrate that it exists.
4. Follow the platform’s reporting process for nonconsensual intimate imagery or impersonation. Supply sensitive material only through an appropriate reporting channel if specifically required; do not upload it to a general-purpose detector.
5. Track the outcome by the particular URL and report reference. A removed page does not establish removal from search caches, unrelated hosts or private copies.

Avoid turning a verification article into a directory

A useful public correction names the official source and explains the action. It does not need the abusive sites’ addresses, filenames, victim lists or sample images. Those details can drive new viewers to the harm while adding little to the claim being checked. Keep any necessary private evidence separate from a public summary, and do not promise a removal timetable that the receiving service has not provided.

Questions about this case