Showing posts with label rights of publicity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rights of publicity. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 12, 2026

Celebrities are filing trademarks to combat AI clones. Should you?; The Washington Post, May 8, 2026

 , The Washington Post ; Celebrities are filing trademarks to combat AI clones. Should you?

"The lawyers The Post spoke with for this article said that more celebrities might follow McConaughey and Swift in registering trademarks of their likenesses. If they’re using their likenesses or voices in a commercial context — a requirement to claim a trademark — these registrations could act as a safeguard. Pollack said a lot of his clients have asked about filing trademarks as a protection in the AI age.

“McConaughey and Swift registered sound clips, which is not entirely novel,” said Jennifer Rothman, a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania. “That will probably cause more of a trend of people who are actors and singers using those voice clips to claim that their voice itself is a mark.”"

Monday, May 11, 2026

Dua Lipa sues Samsung for $15 million for allegedly using her image to sell TVs; Reuters, May 11, 2026

  , Reuters; Dua Lipa sues Samsung for $15 million for allegedly using her image to sell TVs

"British pop star ‌Dua Lipa has filed a lawsuit against Samsung Electronics seeking at least $15 million in damages, accusing the South Korean tech giant of using her image without permission to market its television sets.

The lawsuit ​alleges that Samsung featured a copyrighted image of the pop star on ​the front of cardboard boxes containing televisions for retail sale, enabling the company ⁠to benefit from what seemed like her endorsement of the product."

Wednesday, May 6, 2026

‘Avatar’ Suit Focuses on Hot Topic in A.I. Age: A Character’s Face; The New York Times, May 5, 2026

 , The New York Times ; ‘Avatar’ Suit Focuses on Hot Topic in A.I. Age: A Character’s Face

"An actress accused the director James Cameron of stealing her likeness to create an “Avatar” character in a lawsuit filed on Tuesday in California — a case that reflects a core fear among Hollywood performers in the artificial intelligence age: losing control of their own faces.

The actress, Q’orianka Kilcher, also sued Disney, which controls the multibillion-dollar “Avatar” franchise, which started in 2009...

The lawsuit involves Neytiri, the digitally created, blue-skinned warrior princess in Mr. Cameron’s three “Avatar” blockbusters. According to the complaint, Mr. Cameron used a photo of Ms. Kilcher as a teenager — without her knowledge — as the foundation for Neytiri, incorporating her features “directly into his production art” and digital production pipeline.

“Neytiri’s lips, chin, jawline and overall mouth shape” in the trilogy “are Q’orianka Kilcher’s,” the complaint said. “This was not a fleeting inspiration or a vague homage; it was a literal transplant of a real teenager’s facial structure.”

In 2010, Ms. Kilcher, who is also an Indigenous rights activist, met Mr. Cameron by chance at a charity event in Hollywood, where he told her that she was the “early inspiration” for Neytiri’s look, according to the complaint. “She did not take this to mean that her actual face had been replicated,” the complaint said.

Ms. Kilcher is suing now, the complaint said, because of an interview that Mr. Cameron gave to a French media outlet in 2024. In the interview, Mr. Cameron mentions Ms. Kilcher and “points to an image of Neytiri and says unambiguously: ‘This is actually her lower face,’” the complaint said. The interview came to her attention a year later."

Friday, May 1, 2026

When Copyright Falls Short: Why Celebrities Are Turning to Trademark Law to Fight AI; JDSupra, April 30, 2026

Kaufman & Canoles, JDSupra; When Copyright Falls Short: Why Celebrities Are Turning to Trademark Law to Fight AI

"The filings come as traditional copyright laws fail to guard against AI-generated content. AI can now generate completely new content that mimics an artist’s voice without outright copying."

Val Kilmer’s Daughter Responds to Criticism of AI Performance, Says Late Dad Wanted to ‘Set Precedent; TODAY, April 29, 2026

  Scott Stump, TODAY; Val Kilmer’s Daughter Responds to Criticism of AI Performance, Says Late Dad Wanted to ‘Set Precedent’

"Val Kilmer’s daughter explained why her family supports an AI-generated version of the late actor appearing in an upcoming movie, which has sparked a fierce debate in a Hollywood industry on edge about AI taking jobs from actors.

Mercedes Kilmer, 34, spoke on TODAY April 29 about an AI-generated version of the late star of "Top Gun," "The Doors" and "Tombstone" appearing as Father Fintan, a priest and Native American spiritualist in the upcoming movie "As Deep as the Grave." 

She said her father "wanted to do this" out of a desire to create "structures for actors to own their licensing and to have rights.""

Tuesday, April 28, 2026

Taylor Swift files to trademark her voice, likeness to ward off AI deepfakes; Reuters, April 27, 2026

  , Reuters; Taylor Swift files to trademark her voice, likeness to ward off AI deepfakes

"Pop superstar Taylor Swift filed trademark applications for two audio clips and one image of ‌herself in what a trademark attorney said is an attempt to protect her voice and likeness from deepfake videos and audio created by artificial intelligence.

The applications were filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on Friday and list Swift's TAS ​Rights Management as being the owner of the audio clips and image."

Printify Releases Guide on How to Avoid Copyright Infringement with T-shirts; The National Law Review, April 28, 2026

 Press Release, The National Law Review; Printify Releases Guide on How to Avoid Copyright Infringement with T-shirts

"Printify, a leading print-on-demand platform, has announced the release of a comprehensive new guide designed to help entrepreneurs understand how to avoid copyright infringement when creating and selling custom apparel. As the t-shirt business continues to attract new creators, the risk of legal missteps—ranging from cease-and-desist letters to costly lawsuits—has become a major concern across the industry.

The guide delivers a clear, practical breakdown of intellectual property rules, helping sellers navigate the complexities of copyright, trademark, and publicity rights. By combining legal fundamentals with actionable advice, Printify aims to give entrepreneurs the confidence to create and scale their businesses without unnecessary risk.

Launching a t-shirt business has never been more accessible, but legal awareness remains one of the most overlooked aspects of success. With this release, Printify places itself at the center of a safer, more informed approach to building apparel brands."

Tuesday, April 21, 2026

YouTube Opens Up AI Deepfake Detection Tool to All of Hollywood (Exclusive); The Hollywood Reporter, April 21, 2026

 Alex Weprin, The Hollywood Reporter ; YouTube Opens Up AI Deepfake Detection Tool to All of Hollywood (Exclusive)

The tool, which requires a celebrity to upload their likeness, will flag potentially infringing content — like, say, a star playing a role in fan-generated movie — for a possible takedown.

"Executives at the Google-owned platform tell The Hollywood Reporter that their proprietary deepfake detection tool, years in the making, is now open to anyone at high risk of having their likeness abused: Actors, athletes, creators and musicians, whether they have a YouTube channel or not, can sign up to identify and request removal of deepfakes on its platform...

The timing of the tool’s expansion comes as the industry grapples with the continued growth of deepfakes across platforms, and with video models quickly turning hypothetical worst-case scenarios into reality for many stars."

Tuesday, April 7, 2026

The Copyright Act in the age of AI; Politico, April 6, 2026

 AARON MAK , Politico; The Copyright Act in the age of AI

"The Copyright Act is reaching a major milestone this year, yet some legal scholars aren’t sure how well it will hold up in the age of artificial intelligence.

Stanford University held a summit on Friday to celebrate (and fret about) the 1976 act, which is the foundation of modern copyright law, as the 50th anniversary of its signing approaches in October. Academics advanced a number of proposals to update and reinterpret American copyright law, though several also warned against stretching it too far. The consensus: AI will reshape copyright whether we like it or not, and that it’s time to grapple with the implications."

Saturday, March 14, 2026

What Was Grammarly Thinking?; The Atlantic, March 12, 2026

 Kaitlyn Tiffany, The Atlantic ; What Was Grammarly Thinking?

A short-lived AI tool promised to help users write like the greats—and a bunch of other random people, including me.

"But in the age of generative AI, there are many new kinds of copying. For instance, Wired reported last week on a tool offered by Grammarly, which briefly offered users the opportunity to put their writing through something called “Expert Review.” This produced AI-generated advice purportedly from the perspective of a bunch of famous authors, a bunch of less-famous working journalists (including myself, per The Verge’s reporting), and a bunch of academics (including some who had recently died).

I say “briefly” because the company deactivated the feature today. A lot of people got really mad about it because none of the experts had agreed for their work to be used in such a way, or to serve as uncompensated marketing for an app that people use to help them write more legible emails. “We hear the feedback and recognize we fell short on this,” the company’s CEO, Shishir Mehrotra, wrote on his LinkedIn page yesterday. Not long after, Wired reported that one of the journalists whose name had been used in the feature, Julia Angwin, was filing a class-action lawsuit against Grammarly’s owner, Superhuman Platform. In a statement forwarded by a spokesperson, Mehrotra repeated apologies made in his LinkedIn post and added, "We have reviewed the lawsuit, and we believe the legal claims are without merit and will strongly defend against them.”...

Now that I’ve looked more closely at this not-very-useful feature, and now that it’s shut down, the whole situation seems a little absurd. This was just a weird and inappropriate thing that a company tried to do to make money without putting in very much effort. The primary reason it became a news story at all was that it touched on widespread anxiety about whose work is worth what, whose skills will continue to be marketable in the age of AI, and whether any of us are really as complex, singular, and impossible-to-imitate as we might hope we are."

Friday, March 13, 2026

Former NFL players decry White House video mixing big hits, airstrikes; The Washington Post, March 12, 2026

 , The Washington Post; Former NFL players decry White House video mixing big hits, airstrikes

"The football montage, which was still online as of Thursday morning and by that time had collected over 10 million views on X, was met with criticism from members of the college and pro football community, not simply for the comparison of war and sport, but for the NFL’s and other rightsholders’ failure to object to the use of the images."

Monday, March 2, 2026

Everybody’s Talking About AI: Takeaways from the February 20, 2026 Fordham Law Symposium; Lexology, February 26, 2026

 Seyfarth Shaw LLP - Owen Wolfe, Lexology; Everybody’s Talking About AI: Takeaways from the February 20, 2026 Fordham Law Symposium

"On February 20, 2026, Gadgets, Gigabytes and Goodwill Blog co-editor Owen Wolfe spoke at the Fordham School of Law as part of the Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal Symposium, The Meaning of Ownership: Rethinking Intellectual Property, Creativity, and Control in the Age of Innovation. Owen discussed how courts have so far applied the “fair use” doctrine to cases involving generative AI, distinguishing between use of copyrighted materials in gen AI training and gen AI outputs that are alleged to be substantially similar to the original works. He noted that the decisions to date have been mixed, with some courts finding that certain uses of copyrighted works for AI training are fair use, and other courts expressing skepticism about whether that is the correct result. Owen also surveyed arguments both for and against a finding of fair use, giving the audience food for thought about what courts might decide in the future and whether we might see an amendment to the Copyright Act down the road.

Owen’s talk followed one by Dr. Douglas Lind, a professor at Virginia Tech, who surveyed the history of copyright law in the United States. He focused on the law’s treatment of phonograph records and sound recordings when those new technologies first emerged. Dr. Lind noted that copyright law evolved, and the Copyright Act was eventually amended, to address those new technologies. Dr. Lind raised the question of whether the Copyright Act should be amended again to address gen AI."

Wednesday, February 18, 2026

Dinner Is Being Recorded, Whether You Know It or Not; The New York Times, February 16, 2026

  , The New York Times; Dinner Is Being Recorded, Whether You Know It or Not

"To be in public is to risk being filmed. And these days, there’s a good chance it’s happening surreptitiously with smart glasses. Their wearers are filming in restaurants, cafes and bars, capturing warped, eye-level video of drive-through pranks, Michelin-starred meals and work shifts at Texas Roadhouse. Servers, owners and customers can end up as captive participants...

Filming in public spaces is broadly protected by the First Amendment. Some states, including California and Pennsylvania, have two-party consent laws that prohibit recording without express permission, but enforcing them hinges on whether someone has a “reasonable expectation of privacy” in a given setting, said Aaron Krowne, a New York City lawyer specializing in privacy and civil liberties. Restaurants fall in a legal gray area: They are privately owned, but open to anyone who walks in...

The responsibility of using these devices ethically falls largely on the wearer."

Monday, February 16, 2026

ByteDance says it will add safeguards to Seedance 2.0 following Hollywood backlash; CNBC, February 16, 2026

 Dylan Butts, CNBC; ByteDance says it will add safeguards to Seedance 2.0 following Hollywood backlash

"Chinese tech giant ByteDance has said it will strengthen safeguards on a new artificial intelligence video-making tool, following complaints of copyright theft from entertainment giants. 

The tool, Seedance 2.0, enables users to create realistic videos based on text prompts. However, viral videos shared online appear to show copyrighted characters and celebrity likenesses, raising intellectual property concerns in the U.S. 

“ByteDance respects intellectual property rights and we have heard the concerns regarding Seedance 2.0,” a company spokesperson said in a statement shared with CNBC."

Sunday, January 18, 2026

Matthew McConaughey Trademarks ‘Alright, Alright, Alright!’ and Other IP as Legal Protections Against ‘AI Misuse’; Variety, January 14, 2026

 Todd Spangler, Variety; Matthew McConaughey Trademarks ‘Alright, Alright, Alright!’ and Other IP as Legal Protections Against ‘AI Misuse’

"Matthew McConaughey’s lawyers want you to know that using AI to replicate the actor’s famous catchphrase is not “alright, alright, alright.”

Attorneys for entertainment law firm Yorn Levine representing McConaughey have secured eight trademarks from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office over the last several months for their client, which they said is aimed at protecting his voice and likeness from unauthorized AI misuse."

Saturday, October 18, 2025

OpenAI Blocks Videos of Martin Luther King Jr. After Racist Depictions; The New York Times, October 17, 2025

, The New York Times ; OpenAI Blocks Videos of Martin Luther King Jr. After Racist Depictions


[Kip Currier: This latest tech company debacle is another example of breakdowns in technology design thinking and ethical leadership. No one in all of OpenAI could foresee that Sora 2.0 might be used in these ways? Or they did but didn't care? Either way, this is morally reckless and/or negligent conduct.

The leaders and design folks at OpenAI (and other tech companies) would be well-advised to look at Tool 6 in An Ethical Toolkit for Engineering/Design Practice, created by Santa Clara University Markkula Center for Applied Ethics:

Tool 6: Think About the Terrible People: Positive thinking about our work, as Tool 5 reminds us, is an important part of ethical design. But we must not envision our work being used only by the wisest and best people, in the wisest and best ways. In reality, technology is power, and there will always be those who wish to abuse that power. This tool helps design teams to manage the risks associated with technology abuse.

https://www.scu.edu/ethics-in-technology-practice/ethical-toolkit/

The "Move Fast and Break Things" ethos is alive and well in Big Tech.]


[Excerpt]

"OpenAI said Thursday that it was blocking people from creating videos using the image of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. with its Sora app after users created vulgar and racist depictions of him.

The company said it had made the decision at the request of the King Center as well as Dr. Bernice King, the civil rights leader’s daughter, who had objected to the videos.

The announcement was another effort by OpenAI to respond to criticism of its tools, which critics say operate with few safeguards.

“Some users generated disrespectful depictions of Dr. King’s image,” OpenAI said in a statement. “OpenAI has paused generations depicting Dr. King as it strengthens guardrails for historical figures.”"

Saturday, October 11, 2025

AI videos of dead celebrities are horrifying many of their families; The Washington Post, October 11, 2025

 

, The Washington Post; AI videos of dead celebrities are horrifying many of their families


[Kip Currier: OpenAI CEO Sam Altman's reckless actions in releasing Sora 2.0 without guardrails and accountability mechanisms exemplify Big Tech's ongoing Zuckerberg-ian "Move Fast and Break Thingsmodus operandi in the AI Age. 

Altman also had to recently walk back his ill-conceived directive that copyright holders would need to opt-out of having their copyrighted works used as AI training data (yet again!), rather than the burden being on OpenAI to secure their opt-ins through licensing.

To learn more about potential further copyright-related questionable conduct by OpenAI, read this 10/10/25 Bloomberg Law article:  OpenAI Risks Billions as Court Weighs Privilege in Copyright Row]

[Excerpt]

"OpenAI said the text-to-video tool would depict real people only with their consent. But it exempted “historical figures” from these limits during its launch last week, allowing anyone to make fake videos resurrecting public figures, including activists, celebrities and political leaders — and leaving some of their relatives horrified.

“It is deeply disrespectful and hurtful to see my father’s image used in such a cavalier and insensitive manner when he dedicated his life to truth,” Shabazz, whose father was assassinated in front of her in 1965 when she was 2, told The Washington Post. She questioned why the developers were not acting “with the same morality, conscience, and care … that they’d want for their own families.”

Sora’s videos have sparked agitation and disgust from many of the depicted celebrities’ loved ones, including actor Robin Williams’s daughter, Zelda Williams, who pleaded in an Instagram post recently for people to “stop sending me AI videos of dad.”"

Saturday, August 30, 2025

DHS references Mexican IndyCar driver to promote ‘Speedway Slammer’ detention center; The Guardian, August 7, 2025

 Agencies , The Guardian; DHS references Mexican IndyCar driver to promote ‘Speedway Slammer’ detention center


[Kip Currier: Not only is this statement by a DHS spokesperson factually inaccurate, as there's a cogent argument these actions by DHS may negatively impact trademark rights (and rights of publicity) -- “An AI generated image of a car with ‘ICE’ on the side does not violate anyone’s intellectual property rights" -- it's also morally offensive to either recklessly or intentionally appropriate without permission the racing number of one of the top Mexican drivers for use in a DHS promotion that demeans human beings.]


[Excerpt]

"IndyCar driver Pato O’Ward and series officials were shocked by a social media post from the Department of Homeland Security that touts plans for an immigration detention center in Indiana dubbed “Speedway Slammer.” It includes a car with the same number as that of O’Ward, the only Mexican driver in the series.

“It caught a lot of people off guard. Definitely caught me off guard,” O’Ward said Wednesday. “I was just a little bit shocked at the coincidences of that and, you know, of what it means ... I don’t think it made a lot of people proud, to say the least.”

The post on Tuesday included an AI-generated image of a IndyCar-style vehicle with O’Ward’s No 5 that has “ICE” stamped on it. In the image, the car is in front of a jail...

“We were unaware of plans to incorporate our imagery as part of yesterday’s announcement,” IndyCar said in a statement Wednesday. “Consistent with our approach to public policy and political issues, we are communicating our preference that our IP not be utilized moving forward in relation to this matter.”

A DHS spokesperson said it would not change the social media post. “An AI generated image of a car with ‘ICE’ on the side does not violate anyone’s intellectual property rights. Any suggestion to the contrary is absurd,” the spokesperson said in statement. “DHS will continue promoting the ‘Speedway Slammer’ as a comprehensive and collaborative approach to combatting illegal immigration.”