Public roundtable: AI and protections for use of an individual’s name, image, likeness, or reputation; United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Monday, August 5, 2024 9 AM EDT - 4:30 PM EDT

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO); Public roundtable: AI and protections for use of an individual’s name, image, likeness, or reputation

"The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) invites members of the public to a roundtable discussion about the intersection of artificial intelligence (AI) technology and legal protections for individuals’ reputations and name, image, voice, likeness (NIL), and other indicators of identity. 

This is your opportunity to provide input on:

• Whether existing legal protections for individuals’ NIL and reputations are sufficient
• How these legal protections intersect with other intellectual property (IP) laws
• How AI technology impacts existing legal protections for NIL and reputation

The feedback received will assist the USPTO’s work to develop IP policy recommendations regarding the intersection of AI and IP, in accordance with the  Executive Order on AI ssued by President Biden in October 2023.

The roundtable will consist of two sessions: A morning in-person session at USPTO headquarters in Alexandria, Virginia, and an afternoon virtual session. Both sessions will be livestreamed."

Following Scarlett Johansson Flap, Intellectual Property Expert Talks AI and the Law; UVAToday, June 24, 2024

Josette Corazza, UVAToday ; Following Scarlett Johansson Flap, Intellectual Property Expert Talks AI and the Law

"UVA School of Law professor Dotan Oliar, an expert in intellectual property who teaches art law and copyright, looked at the OpenAI controversies and how artificial intelligence is raising new legal questions and reviving old debates.

Q. What recourse does an actor have when Open AI claims to use a similar voice, but not the actual voice?

A. The “right of publicity” is the relevant body of intellectual property law available to celebrities who believe their voice (or image or likeness) was misappropriated. This is a state, rather than federal, cause of (legal) action and a right now protected in the majority of states, although the scope of protection is not the same everywhere.

In a similar case from 1988, Ford Motor Co. wanted to use Bette Midler’s voice for a commercial, and just like reportedly happened here, Midler declined. Ford went and hired a “sound-alike” person. In a then-precedential ruling, the 9th Circuit Court decided in Midler’s favor and held that a person’s voice was a protected attribute within their right of publicity."

AI can make up songs now, but who owns the copyright? The answer is complicated; The Conversation, May 13, 2024

Wellett Potter, Lecturer in Law, University of New England , The Conversation; ; AI can make up songs now, but who owns the copyright? The answer is complicated

"With the rapid development of this technology, it is timely to debate whether a similar right of publicity should be introduced in Australia. If so, it would help to safeguard the identity and performance rights of all Australians and also protect against potential AI voice crimes."

George Carlin’s Estate Reaches Settlement After A.I. Podcast; The New York Times, April 2, 2024

Christopher Kuo , The New York Times; George Carlin’s Estate Reaches Settlement After A.I. Podcast

"The estate of the comedian George Carlin reached a settlement on Monday with the makers of a podcast who had said they had used artificial intelligence to impersonate Mr. Carlin for a comedy special...

Mr. Carlin’s estate filed the suit in January, saying that Mr. Sasso and Mr. Kultgen, hosts of the podcast “Dudesy,” had infringed on the estate’s copyrights by training an A.I. algorithm on five decades of Mr. Carlin’s work for the special “George Carlin: I’m Glad I’m Dead,” which was posted on YouTube. The lawsuit also said they had illegally used Mr. Carlin’s name and likeness."

Tennessee becomes the first state to protect musicians and other artists against AI; NPR, March 22, 2024

  Rebecca Rosman, NPR; Tennessee becomes the first state to protect musicians and other artists against AI

"Tennessee made history on Thursday, becoming the first U.S. state to sign off on legislation to protect musicians from unauthorized artificial intelligence impersonation.

"Tennessee (sic) is the music capital of the world, & we're leading the nation with historic protections for TN artists & songwriters against emerging AI technology," Gov. Bill Lee announced on social media.

The Ensuring Likeness Voice and Image Security Act, or ELVIS Act, is an updated version of the state's old right of publicity law. While the old law protected an artist's name, photograph or likeness, the new legislation includes AI-specific protections."

Artificial Intelligence Law - Intellectual Property Protection for your voice?; JDSupra, January 22, 2024

Steve Vondran, JDSupra ; Artificial Intelligence Law - Intellectual Property Protection for your voice?

"With the advent of AI technology capable of replicating a person's voice and utilizing it for commercial purposes, several key legal issues are likely to emerge under California's right of publicity law. The right of publicity refers to an individual's right to control and profit from their own name, image, likeness, or voice.

Determining the extent of a person's control over their own voice will likely become a contentious legal matter given the rise of AI technology. In 2024, with a mere prompt and a push of a button, a creator can generate highly accurate voice replicas, potentially allowing companies to utilize a person's voice without their explicit permission for example using a AI generated song in a video, or podcast, or using it as a voice-over for a commercial project. This sounds like fun new technology, until you realize that in states like California where a "right of publicity law" exists a persons VOICE can be a protectable asset that one can sue to protect others who wrongfully misuse their voice for commercial advertising purposes.

This blog will discuss a few new legal issues I see arising in our wonderful new digital age being fueled by the massive onset of Generative AI technology (which really just means you input prompts into an AI tool and it will generate art, text, images, music, etc."

George Carlin Estate Sues Creators of AI-Generated Comedy Special in Key Lawsuit Over Stars’ Likenesses; The Hollywood Reporter, January 25, 2024

 Winston Cho, The Hollywood Reporter ; George Carlin Estate Sues Creators of AI-Generated Comedy Special in Key Lawsuit Over Stars’ Likenesses

"The complaint seeks a court order for immediate removal of the special, as well as unspecified damages. It’s among the first legal actions taken by the estate of a deceased celebrity for unlicensed use of their work and likeness to manufacture a new, AI-generated creation and was filed as Hollywood is sounding the alarm over utilization of AI to impersonate people without consent or compensation...

According to the complaint, the special was created through unauthorized use of Carlin’s copyrighted works.

At the start of the video, it’s explained that the AI program that created the special ingested five decades of Carlin’s original stand-up routines, which are owned by the comedian’s estate, as training materials, “thereby making unauthorized copies” of the copyrighted works...

If signed into law, the proposal, called the No AI Fraud Act, could curb a growing trend of individuals and businesses creating AI-recorded tracks using artists’ voices and deceptive ads in which it appears a performer is endorsing a product. In the absence of a federal right of publicity law, unions and trade groups in Hollywood have been lobbying for legislation requiring individuals’ consent to use their voice and likeness."

Why You Should Care About a Federal Right of Publicity; IP Watchdog, December 15, 2023

 ALYSSA J. DEVINE, IP Watchdog; Why You Should Care About a Federal Right of Publicity

"If you’re reading IPWatchdog, you probably have some familiarity with intellectual property rights, such as patents, copyrights and trademarks. However, one distinct type of intellectual property is often left out and misunderstood. It’s called the right of publicity.

While publicity rights are often confused with other types of intellectual property or privacy rights, or mistakenly associated only with famous individuals, they are incredibly important, far-reaching, and deserve much more attention.

This article will explore the right of publicity, including its history and importance in modern society."

Miss Vanjie! Miss Vanjie!: What RuPaul’s Drag Race Can Teach Us About Fair Use Under Copyright; Lexology, March 15, 2019

Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC - Brian Murphy, Lexology; Miss Vanjie! Miss Vanjie!: What RuPaul’s Drag Race Can Teach Us About Fair Use Under Copyright

"When IP lawyers (myself included) see a funny meme like this one, instead of (or perhaps after) chuckling, we often ask ourselves: did the creator get clearance, and, if not, how many different rights were potentially infringed? The Bart Simpson/Vanjie meme incorporates footage from The Simpsons and audio from Drag Race, potentially implicating copyright; it features the Bart Simpson character, potentially implicating both trademark and copyright law; and it includes the voices of Nancy Cartwright and Mateo, potentially implicating right of publicity. It’s highly unlikely that the genius behind this meme got permission from any of the rights holders. Which raises the question: did he or she need to?

This question is an important one. Although many (most?) people, at one time or another, have incorporated third party content (without permission) in public social posts or private texts, few (I am certain) have given much thought to what they were doing. In this post, I briefly outline some thoughts on the copyright issues raised when third party content (including film clips, audio, and photography) is used in memes. (I leave trademark and right of publicity issues for another day.) My conclusion is that while I believe the use, without permission, of third party content in memes, as a matter of policy, often presents a compelling case for fair use under copyright law – at least where the use is not commercial and serves a socially valuable communicative purpose – I am not confident that courts, under current precedents, would consistently find them to be so.

If you think that memes like these are frivolities that do not warrant serious investigation, think again. The creation and sharing of memes has become an important way that news (hard news, soft news, real news and fake news) is shared, commented upon and processed. The unauthorized use of third party content within memes must be evaluated in that context."

Frida Kahlo Barbie doll banned from shop shelves in Mexico; BBC, April 20, 2018

BBC; Frida Kahlo Barbie doll banned from shop shelves in Mexico

"A court has barred sales in Mexico of a controversial Frida Kahlo Barbie doll, ruling that members of her family own the sole rights to her image.

The toy company Mattel launched a range of new Barbie dolls based on "inspiring women" - artist Frida Kahlo among them.

But some of Kahlo's relatives said the manufacturer had used the painter's image without permission."

Adele tells Donald Trump to stop pinching her songs for his campaign; Guardian, 2/1/16

Mark Tran and Amber Jamieson, Guardian; Adele tells Donald Trump to stop pinching her songs for his campaign:

"Was there anything artists could do to make sure someone with completely different political views to them stays away from their music?

“Not really,” said Gordon."