In an ideal world, generated non-consensual imagery should be illegal through invasion of privacy through misappropriation of name or likeness, but I think only a limited number of states have those laws.
In an ideal world, defamation should not be illegal through invasion of specifically privacy. Because that shields perpetrators from clean-room defamations, which is wrong.
I guess I live in such an ideal world? Defamation don't require proofs of breach of privacy where I am, only damages. I've heard that this setup is not universal.
