AI Voice Cloning & Deepfakes: What Are Your Rights?

Generative AI can now copy a person’s voice from a few seconds of audio and graft a familiar face onto video that never happened. That power raises an urgent, very human question: if a machine makes a convincing fake of you, what rights do you actually have? The short version is that this is mostly a right-of-publicity problem, not a copyright problem, and a fast-moving set of new laws is reshaping the answer. This guide explains, in plain English, which legal tools apply, the new AI-specific statutes, and what to do if your voice or face is cloned. For the bigger picture, see our AI and intellectual property pillar guide.

Why cloning is a publicity and likeness issue

People instinctively reach for “copyright” when something of theirs is copied. But your voice and your face are not works of authorship in the copyright sense. The legal idea that protects who you are, as opposed to something you wrote or recorded, is the right of publicity.

The right of publicity is the right to control the commercial use of your identity. It is mostly a matter of state law, so the details vary, but the core concept is consistent: someone generally cannot use the recognizable markers of your identity to advertise, sell, endorse, or impersonate without your consent. A cloned voice that sounds like you, or a deepfake video that looks like you, goes to the heart of that right because it borrows your identity itself.

This framing matters because it changes the analysis. The question is not “did they copy my recording?” but “did they use my identity, and for what purpose?” Commercial and impersonating uses sit squarely in right-of-publicity territory. Genuine news, commentary, parody, and other protected speech are treated differently, because the First Amendment limits how far these rights can reach.

What the law actually protects

Across most right-of-publicity regimes, the protected markers of identity include:

• Name — your real name, and sometimes a nickname or stage name people associate with you.
• Voice — your actual voice, and, in many states, a deliberate imitation or clone meant to make listeners think it is you.
• Image or photograph — any depiction in which you are readily identifiable.
• Likeness — a look-alike, avatar, or rendering that calls you to mind even if it is not a literal photo.

The decisive question is usually purpose: was your identity used to advertise, sell, endorse, or deceive? You do not have to be a celebrity. Everyone has a right of publicity; well-known people simply tend to have more provable commercial value attached to it. For a deep dive on one influential version of this right, see our guide on the California right of publicity.

Why copyright usually does not help

Here is the trap. Copyright protects original works fixed in a tangible medium, such as a specific song recording, a video file, or a script. It does not protect the abstract sound, timbre, or style of a human voice.

That distinction was front and center in Lehrman v. Lovo, Inc., a 2025 case in the federal court for the Southern District of New York. Two professional voice actors alleged that a company obtained their recordings under the promise of limited, internal use, then used them to build and sell AI voice clones. The court dismissed most of the copyright claims, reasoning that a clone which merely mimics the sound of a voice, even if trained on a real recording, is not a “copy” of the recording under the Copyright Act. At the same time, it allowed the right-of-publicity claims to proceed under New York’s Civil Rights Law, including a recently added “digital replica” provision, and let breach-of-contract claims move forward.

The practical takeaway: copyright can matter if someone actually used or reproduced your existing recording (for example, copying it into a promo, or arguably beyond what a license allowed), but for the cloned voice itself, the right of publicity is generally the stronger tool. This is also why reading the fine print of any recording, licensing, or “personal services” contract is so important.

The new AI-specific laws

Lawmakers recognized that traditional rights were a clumsy fit for synthetic media, so a wave of digital-replica statutes arrived.

Tennessee’s ELVIS Act (2024). The Ensuring Likeness Voice and Image Security Act was signed in March 2024 and took effect July 1, 2024. It is widely described as the first U.S. law to explicitly add voice to the protected list alongside name, photograph, and likeness, and it specifically targets AI voice clones and audio deepfakes. It also reaches those who provide tools or services whose primary purpose is producing an unauthorized replica, which is broader than many older publicity laws.

California’s AB 1836 and AB 2602 (2024). California passed two complementary laws aimed at digital replicas, which took effect in 2025. AB 2602 works through contracts: it makes a contract provision unenforceable if it lets a company create and use a digital replica of a performer’s voice or likeness in place of work they would have done in person, unless the use is described with reasonable specificity and the performer was professionally represented (by counsel or a union) in the negotiation. AB 1836 targets deceased performers, creating liability for producing or distributing an AI digital replica of a dead personality’s voice or likeness in expressive audiovisual works or sound recordings without consent from the estate. For how these fit California’s broader scheme, see the California right of publicity guide.

The federal NO FAKES Act (proposed, not yet law). The Nurture Originals, Foster Art, and Keep Entertainment Safe (NO FAKES) Act would create a nationwide right against unauthorized digital replicas of a person’s voice or likeness. It has been introduced and reintroduced in Congress, with backing from parts of the entertainment and technology industries, but as of this writing it has not been enacted. Critics, including free-speech groups, warn it could sweep in protected expression. Treat it as a proposal to watch, not current law. We track its details in our guide to the NO FAKES Act and digital-replica laws.

FTC impersonation rules. Separately, the Federal Trade Commission finalized a rule in 2024 targeting the impersonation of government and businesses, and proposed extending protections to the impersonation of individuals, expressly citing AI deepfakes as a driver of fraud. These rules are about deceptive and fraudulent impersonation rather than a personal property right in your identity, but they are part of the enforcement landscape, especially for scams.

What to do if your voice or face is cloned

If you discover an unauthorized clone or deepfake, a measured, evidence-first approach usually serves you best:

1. Document everything immediately. Save the audio or video file, URLs, screenshots, dates, and a record of where it appeared and for how long. Synthetic content gets taken down or altered quickly once you complain.
2. Identify the purpose. Is it advertising, a product, an endorsement, or an impersonation (strong for a right-of-publicity or state-law claim), or is it news, commentary, parody, or other protected speech (often harder to stop)?
3. Use platform tools. Most major platforms have reporting and takedown processes for impersonation, non-consensual synthetic media, or, where a real recording was copied, copyright. Where your actual recording was reused, a DMCA takedown may apply.
4. Consider a demand or takedown letter. Many disputes end when a clear, documented request to stop reaches the right person or company.
5. Mind the deadlines. Right-of-publicity and related claims have statutes of limitations. Waiting too long can forfeit the claim.
6. Get tailored advice. Because the laws vary by state, the free-speech analysis is nuanced, and remedies differ, consult an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.

What creators using AI voices must clear

The flip side matters too. If you are building content with AI voices or faces, the safest path is to clear rights before you publish.

• Get consent for any real person. If an AI output is recognizable as a specific individual’s voice or likeness, you generally need that person’s permission for commercial use, ideally a written release that spells out the scope.
• Read your vendor’s license and your source contracts. Confirm the AI tool actually had the right to use the training material, and that any “personal services” contract with a performer describes digital-replica use specifically. Vague boilerplate may be unenforceable under laws like AB 2602.
• Watch the deceased, too. Recreating a late artist or public figure can trigger post-mortem rights and laws like AB 1836; clear it with the estate.
• Avoid implying endorsement. Even a synthetic voice that merely suggests a real person endorses your product can create exposure, and may invite FTC scrutiny if it deceives consumers.
• Disclose where appropriate. Labeling AI-generated content does not erase publicity rights, but transparency reduces deception claims and reputational risk.

For more on how these identity rights connect to the rest of the field, browse our publicity topic hub.

The bottom line

When AI clones your voice or face, your strongest tool is usually the right of publicity, not copyright, because copyright protects specific recordings rather than the sound or look of a person. A new generation of statutes, Tennessee’s ELVIS Act, California’s AB 1836 and AB 2602, and others, now aims directly at digital replicas, while the federal NO FAKES Act remains a proposal rather than law. If you are cloned, document it early and act quickly; if you build with AI voices, clear consent and contracts before you publish.

This article is general educational information about U.S. law, not legal advice, and it does not create an attorney-client relationship. AI and right-of-publicity law is fact-specific, varies by state, and is changing rapidly. For advice about your situation, consult an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.