Forged evidence is a problem that has existed in court before. The whole concept of a clean chain of custody of media or an object, the trustworthiness of the thing that generated it, people being able to argue that something is fake and then prove it, has been around for centuries.

There was a brief period during which we could make exact digital replicas of what happened, but not fake them very well, and it sounds like that's drawing to a close. But that just means video is on the same footing as every other type of evidence.

I think that things like mapping hot/cold pixels, noise modeling etc will come into play to prove source

AI is a new technology but video, images, and documents have always been able to be forged.

In the US at least, there's a lot of groundwork that needs to be laid in order for this kind of evidence to actually be admissable. You can't just show any video or photo and say it's real. You need to establish where it came from, how it came into your possession, and how it's relevant.

Doesn't mean forgeries never make it I to court, but just because you can make a fake video easier than before doesn't mean you can just get it into court easily. Especially since if someone does think it's suspicious, that will be discussed and ruled on long before the trial itself begins. And even if they can't outright prove it's fake, it may not be admissible just due to how suspicious it is.

A long time.

Digital evidence, like any other evidence, is something that is shared between the plaintiffs and the defense prior to being admitted in court for the judge or the jury to review.

If there is suspicion over whether it is authentic, there are experts that can be brought in to confirm the validity of the digital evidence.

That is not to say that there is no likelihood that false digital evidence can be successfully brought to court, but the likelihood is very small, assuming that each side is doing their part to the letter and spirit of the law.

Forgeries are nothing new. Society has always worked on trust and best guesses. Nothing has changed.

Relevant xkcd: https://xkcd.com/2650/

Law enforcement fabricating evidence is probably a much bigger issue. No matter how well you verify the accurarcy of your own evidence, if the system is corrupt, then it doesnt matter. Digital media is only one small part of that problem. Server logs, message logs, existence of files on your confiscated devices, call logs, etc. can all be fabricated by police. Fabricating images is just a cherry on top.

Cops can just raid your house, confiscate your drives, carefully plant CP on them and claim that you were in posession of CP. Im pretty sure this has happened before.

Court cases are all about constructing narratives—AI is just the legal system distilled to its essence.