The NO FAKES Act & State Digital-Replica Laws, Explained

Generative AI can now copy a person’s face and voice convincingly enough to fool friends, fans, and customers. That has triggered a wave of new laws — some passed, many still pending — built around a single phrase: the digital replica. This guide explains, in plain English, what these laws do, the difference between what is enacted and what is merely proposed, and what creators and businesses can do right now. For the bigger picture of how AI collides with intellectual property, start with our AI & IP pillar guide, and for the technology itself see AI voice cloning & deepfakes.

What a “digital replica” law actually does

A “digital replica” law targets a specific harm: someone using AI to recreate a real, identifiable person’s voice or visual likeness without permission. The replica is usually defined as a computer-generated, highly realistic electronic representation that an ordinary person would recognize as a particular individual.

These laws generally try to do a few things at once:

• Create a right to say no. They let an individual (or their estate) control whether a realistic AI clone of their voice or likeness can be made and distributed.
• Provide a way to sue. They establish a civil cause of action, often with minimum statutory damages, injunctions, and sometimes destruction of the offending material.
• Reach the tools, not just the output. Some statutes also target the people who build or distribute software whose main purpose is producing unauthorized replicas.
• Protect free speech. Because a clone can appear in news, satire, documentary, or commentary, these laws carve out First Amendment-protected uses.

The hard part is drawing the line between a harmful fake and protected expression. That tension explains why so much of this area is still being debated rather than settled.

The federal NO FAKES Act (PROPOSED — not yet law)

The NO FAKES Act — short for “Nurture Originals, Foster Art, and Keep Entertainment Safe” — is a proposed federal bill. It has not been enacted. An earlier version was introduced in 2024 and did not advance. It was reintroduced in 2025 (as S. 1367 and a House companion), and a revised Senate version, S. 4591, advanced out of the Senate Judiciary Committee by a unanimous voice vote on June 18, 2026. Clearing committee is a milestone, not the finish line: the bill still must pass the full Senate, pass the House, and be signed by the President before it becomes law. As of this writing, none of that has happened.

If enacted, the NO FAKES Act would, in broad strokes:

• Create a federal property right in a person’s own voice and visual likeness — a nationwide, licensable right to control AI digital replicas.
• Impose liability on individuals and companies that produce or distribute an unauthorized digital replica.
• Add a notice-and-takedown system modeled on the DMCA, letting people demand that online platforms promptly remove unauthorized replicas. (For how the existing takedown system works, see our DMCA takedown guide.)
• Build in safe harbors and exclusions for First Amendment-protected speech such as news reporting, commentary, parody, and criticism, plus exemptions for certain educational and archival uses.

Even some supporters have flagged concerns about whether the bill adequately protects “legitimate First Amendment speech,” so the text may change before any final vote. Until it is signed into law, do not treat the NO FAKES Act as binding. The enforceable protections today come from state law.

The Tennessee ELVIS Act (ENACTED — effective July 1, 2024)

Tennessee’s ELVIS Act (“Ensuring Likeness Voice and Image Security Act”) is enacted law. It was signed on March 21, 2024, and took effect July 1, 2024. It updates Tennessee’s older Personal Rights Protection Act of 1984 for the AI era.

What makes it notable:

• It explicitly adds voice to the protected elements of a person’s identity, alongside name, photograph, and likeness — and it is widely described as the first U.S. statute to focus specifically on AI-generated voice replicas.
• It protects against an unauthorized AI simulation that merely sounds like a person, not just a literal recording of their real voice.
• It reaches the tools: it allows claims against anyone who makes available an algorithm, software, or service whose primary purpose is producing unauthorized replicas of a person’s voice or likeness.
• Remedies include injunctions, impoundment or destruction of infringing materials, and actual damages plus the violator’s profits.

The ELVIS Act grew out of Nashville’s music industry, but it protects any individual covered by Tennessee law — not only famous performers.

California’s AB 1836 and AB 2602 (ENACTED — effective January 1, 2025)

California passed a cluster of digital-replica bills, both signed in September 2024 and both effective January 1, 2025. Two are central.

AB 1836 (deceased performers’ digital replicas) — ENACTED. This law expands California’s post-mortem right of publicity (Civil Code section 3344.1) to cover AI clones of people who have died. It creates a cause of action against anyone who produces, distributes, or makes available a digital replica of a deceased personality’s voice or likeness in an audiovisual work or sound recording without consent from the estate or heirs. It sets a minimum award of $10,000 (or actual damages plus profits, if greater) and includes exemptions for news, public affairs, sports, commentary, criticism, scholarship, satire, parody, documentary, and other expressive uses.

AB 2602 (digital-replica contract clauses) — ENACTED. This law addresses the contract side of the problem. It makes a provision in a personal- or professional-services contract unenforceable if it lets a company create and use a digital replica of a performer in place of work they would otherwise have done, unless the contract includes a reasonably specific description of the intended uses and the performer was professionally represented (by counsel or a union) in negotiating it. It applies to new performances fixed on or after January 1, 2025, so it is not retroactive. The practical effect: a vague “we own all rights to your digital double forever” clause buried in a contract may not hold up.

California is not alone — other states, including Illinois, Louisiana, and New York, have adopted or expanded their own digital-replica and right-of-publicity provisions. Because coverage and effective dates vary, always check the specific state that applies to you.

How these laws interact with the existing right of publicity

Digital-replica statutes do not replace the right of publicity — they build on it. The right of publicity is the long-standing rule that you control the commercial use of your identity (name, voice, signature, photograph, likeness). In California it comes from both common law and Civil Code section 3344. You can read the full breakdown in our California right of publicity guide.

The new AI laws fill gaps the older doctrine did not clearly cover:

• Realistic fakes, not just real recordings. A convincing AI voice clone is now squarely addressed, even though it is not a recording of your actual voice.
• Targeting the tools and platforms, not only the end user who posts the clone.
• Clearer post-mortem coverage for AI replicas of people who have died.
• Contract guardrails so consent to a digital double has to be specific and informed.

In a typical dispute, a person might assert several theories at once — the state right of publicity, a digital-replica statute, and possibly false-endorsement or unfair-competition claims. These rights all sit under the broader umbrella of publicity law.

What creators and businesses should do now

You do not have to wait for a federal law to protect yourself. Practical steps:

• Use contracts. Whether you are the talent or the company, spell out exactly whether a digital replica may be made, for what specific uses, for how long, and at what pay. Vague clauses are exactly what California’s AB 2602 targets.
• Document your identity and your uses. Keep dated records of your voice and likeness and of any unauthorized replicas you find — screenshots, URLs, and dates make enforcement far easier.
• Send takedown notices. Many platforms will remove unauthorized AI clones, and if the NO FAKES Act passes, a formal notice-and-takedown route would be added on top.
• Know which state’s law applies. Tennessee, California, and a growing list of states each have different rules and remedies.
• If you build AI tools, review whether your product could be seen as having a “primary purpose” of creating unauthorized replicas — the ELVIS Act reaches tool makers, not just users.

The bottom line

The headline matters: the NO FAKES Act is still a proposal, not law, even though it has cleared a Senate committee. The protections you can actually rely on today come from enacted state laws — Tennessee’s ELVIS Act (effective July 2024) and California’s AB 1836 and AB 2602 (effective January 2025) — layered on top of the traditional right of publicity. Expect this area to keep changing quickly as Congress and the states respond to better, cheaper AI.

This guide is general educational information about intellectual property law, not legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Laws and bill statuses change. For guidance on your specific situation, consult an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.