Entertainment Law Resources
​
  • HOME
  • LAW PRACTICE
    • Mark Litwak
    • Glenn Litwak
    • Pete Wilke
  • ARTICLES & VIDEO CLIPS
    • Video & Audio Clips
  • STORE
  • RESOURCES
  • BLOG
  • CONTACT
  • FAQ
  • SITE MAP
  • CREATIVE ACCOUNTING REVISITED
  • CREATIVE ACCOUNTING REVISITED
  • New Page

NEW LAWS TO  REGULATE  DEEPFAKE  IMAGES

12/17/2024

0 Comments

 
As a result of advances in artificial intelligence, it is now possible to  digitally create realistic  images of people that are indistinguishable from their actual images. In response, California has enacted two new laws, AB 2602 and AB 1836 recently signed by Governor Gavin Newsom. The laws are meant to  protect persons from the unauthorized use of their voice and image with  computer-generated digital replicas. The laws  will restrict the  use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and other technology  by giving actors and others  more protections regarding the use of their images.

AB 2602 is designed to ensure transparency in  the use of people’s  persona by ensuring that they are adequately informed and/or represented during negotiations by either legal counsel or that the agreement is subject to  the terms of a collective bargaining agreement. Under this new law, any contract that permits the creation of a digital replica is unenforceable unless it includes  a reasonably specific description of how the digital replica will be used (unless the usage is otherwise consistent with the terms of the professional services being offered by such individual) and the person is represented by legal counsel or the contract is  subject to  a union agreement.

This law applies  prospectively to new performances, fixed on or after January 1, 2025. The legislation defines  “digital replica” to mean a computer-generated, highly realistic electronic representation that is readily identifiable as the voice or visual likeness of an individual that is embodied in a sound recording, image, audiovisual work, or transmission in which the actual individual either did not actually perform or appear, or the actual individual did perform or appear, but the fundamental character of the performance or appearance has been materially altered.

AB 1836 addresses the use of a  digital replica of a deceased person’s  name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness on or in products, merchandise, or goods, or for advertising or selling, or soliciting purchases of the same  within 70 years of the personality’s death. This bill makes a person who produces or  distribute a  digital replica of a deceased personality’s voice or likeness in an expressive audiovisual work or sound recording without prior consent liable in an amount equal to the greater of $10,000 or the actual damages suffered by the person controlling the rights. The  provision does not apply to plays, books, newspapers, radio and television programs, or other work of political or newsworthy value because they are not considered products, and their use is protected under the First Amendment.

Last summer,  the U.S. Copyright Office published a report proposing  a federal law that would protect against unauthorized digital replicas. The report urged consideration of  legislation that would balance the interests of producers and subjects. Courts would consider a variety of factors including:

  • The purpose of the use, including whether it is commercial;
  • Whether the use is expressive or political in nature;
  • The relevance of the digital replica to the purpose of the use;
  • Whether the use is intentionally deceptive;
  • Whether the replica was labeled;
  • The extent of the harm caused; and
  • The good faith of the user.

Finally,  a bipartisan group of Senators introduced the so called No Fakes Act (S. 4875). The proposed federal law looks to hold individuals and online services such as websites  liable for damages for producing, hosting, or sharing digital replicas, including AI-generated replicas, of an individual performing in audiovisual works, images, or sound recordings without that person's consent or participation. Licenses to be valid have to be in writing and include a specific description of the intended use of the digital replica. There are exclusions for those images used in news, public affairs or sports broadcast, documentaries  or in commentary or criticism. Similar legislation has been introduced in the House (H. R. 9551).
 

0 Comments

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    Archives

    February 2025
    December 2024
    September 2024
    July 2024
    April 2024
    February 2024
    January 2024
    December 2023
    October 2023
    September 2023
    August 2023
    July 2023
    June 2023
    May 2023
    April 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    November 2022
    September 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    May 2021
    March 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    December 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    May 2018
    March 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    August 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    July 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    January 2014
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    February 2012
    December 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    April 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    October 2010
    September 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    February 2010
    December 2009
    November 2009
    October 2009
    September 2009
    July 2009
    June 2009
    January 2009

    Disclaimer: The information in this blog post (“post”) is provided for general informational purposes only and may not reflect the current law in your jurisdiction. No information contained in this post should be construed as legal advice from the individual author, nor is it intended to be a substitute for legal counsel on any subject matter. No reader of this post should act or refrain from acting on the basis of any information included in, or accessible through, this Post without seeking the appropriate legal or other professional advice on the particular facts and circumstances at issue from a lawyer licensed in the recipient’s state, country or other appropriate licensing jurisdiction.
    For older posts, please visit The Litwak Blog.
    Join our Email Newsletter list
    Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon
    For Email Newsletters you can trust
Picture
Home
Law Practice
Store
Articles & Video Clips
Resources

Blog

Contact
FAQ
Site Map

LAW OFFICES OF
MARK LITWAK & ASSOCIATES

201 Santa Monica Blvd.
Suite 300
Santa Monica, California 90401
Phone: 310-859-9595
[email protected]


Follow us on
Join our Email Newsletter list
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon
For Email Newsletters you can trust
Copyright  2013-2025, Mark Litwak. All Rights Reserved.│ Legal Disclaimer │ Terms of Use & Copyright    │  Privacy Policy