Face, Voice, And Even Body Copyrights: What Makes Denmark’s Proposed AI Law So “Pioneering”?
Your physical self may soon become "intellectual property".
Since the last month or so, there’s been much talk about Denmark’s new, and rather surprising, step to copyright the face, voice, and even body of its citizens in the regulation of artificial intelligence (AI). This proposed legislation, an amendment to the Danish Copyright Act, is poised to redefine the intersection of intellectual property (IP), personal rights, and technological advancement, setting a potential precedent for Europe and beyond. This legislation blurs the traditional lines between IP and personal rights, establishing a novel framework where an individual's digital likeness and voice are granted a level of protection akin to copyrighted works.
The proposed law bans the use or reproduction of a person’s likeness, voice, or physical traits without their clear consent. This covers:
– Facial features
– Body shape and posture
– Voice and speech style
– Gestures or expressions used to digitally recreate someone with AI
What’s more, this protection would be automatic. No registration or paperwork required. The rights would apply by default.
How is This Law Different From Others?
Let’s deep dive into what’s so different about this proposed law. For one, it equates even an ordinary person with a celebrity, matter of speaking. You see, till now, laws that exist to fight deepfakes or voice cloning and such stuff are geared towards actual copyright violation of any intellectual property (IP). So, much of it only helps celebrities or works of art, penmanship, movies, and so on, except in cases of violations targeting minors.
Also, many of these laws, especially the US’ "Right of Publicity," are heavily focused on protecting a person's face or voice from unauthorized commercial exploitation (like in advertisements or product endorsements).
Most of these laws are also quite complex. They are “reactive” laws, i.e., only when the aggrieved party perceives a wrong done by, say, an AI company, do these laws, including the “Take It Down” law in the US, offer a recourse.
The Danish approach cuts through the legal complexities and is also geared towards regulating the use of AI-generated imitations of Danish citizens on platforms like social media. Unlike the often convoluted legal workarounds needed in other countries, Denmark's law directly empowers individuals with rights over their digital likeness.
While it certainly covers commercial misuse, its emphasis on "unauthorized digital imitation" means it extends to non-commercial uses as well, aiming to prevent broader digital exploitation and reputational harm, regardless of whether money is being made or not. And, this approach is also “pro-active” (more on this on scroll down). This straightforward legal foundation could be key to effectively combating deepfake misuse.
Could be Revolutionary if Rest of the World Adopts It
The extent to which the European Union (EU) adopts this model will likely shape the global spread of these new digital rights in other parts of the world. It could set a powerful precedent for future EU-wide legislation. This would compel international platforms and global brands to reassess and potentially overhaul their AI policies for all users, not just those within Denmark. The ripple effect could lead to a global standard for digital identity protection in the age of AI. Thus, the proposed Danish law is path-breaking and perhaps a precursor to having all our faces voices, and assorted body parts copyrighted!
The Proactive Approach
Unlike previous laws that often require demonstrable harm to the copyright holder or aggrieved party before action can be taken, the proposed Danish bill empowers individuals with the right to demand the removal of content based solely on unauthorized digital imitation.
This grants individuals an unprecedented degree of digital autonomy, allowing them to assert control over their identity in the digital sphere without waiting for the fallout of misuse. It's a significant move towards preventative legal action in the age of generative AI.
Reclaiming Identity as a Commodity
Here’s another reason why the Danish AI proposed law is unique. It signals the dawn of a new era where a person's identity and performance are formally recognized as valuable commodities that can be owned, controlled, and protected.
This legislative move represents a significant pushback against the long-standing Internet ethos of free and often unconstrained use of public data. It empowers ordinary people like you and me to reclaim agency over their digital selves, asserting our right to control how our unique attributes are used, especially in the context of rapidly evolving generative AI technologies.
The Impact on Creative Works and Broader IP
A New Class of IP
This legislation fundamentally expands the very definition of intellectual property. By offering protection for "artistic performances," the law acknowledges that a performer's unique style, voice, or mannerisms are now legally safeguarded, even when they are not directly linked to a specific copyrighted work like a film, song, or theatrical production. A crucial aspect of this new law is its treatment of a person's likeness and voice as a protected asset, thus offering a "copyright-like" protection framework. This creates a new class of intellectual property, recognizing the inherent value in an individual's unique performative identity.
This effectively creates a new kind of IP right:
It’s automatic (like moral rights in copyright).
It’s exclusive (no one can use your likeness without consent).
It’s enforceable (you can demand takedowns and seek compensation).
It covers digital reproductions via AI, which existing copyright laws generally don’t.
Get our 8-week email course on artificial intelligence for those in the 40+ age group.
Ethical Questions
While the proposed law offers crucial protection against digital exploitation, it also raises ethical questions. The concept of a person's identity becoming a "protected asset" prompts debate about the commodification of self. However, the moral imperative behind the law is clear: to prevent the unauthorized and potentially harmful use of an individual's identity by AI, safeguarding personal dignity and control in an increasingly digital world, so where ethics is concerned, one needs to weigh the intended purpose of the law versus the commodification of a human being.
The Technological & Enforcement Challenge
The Burden on Tech Giants
The Danish law places a significant burden of compliance directly on social media platforms and other content hosts. It stipulates "severe fines" for failing to comply with takedown requests related to unauthorized AI-generated imitations.
🔍 1. Proactive Monitoring and Takedown
Platforms will be required to quickly remove unauthorized AI-generated content that uses a person’s likeness if the person (or their legal representative) demands it.
They must respond swiftly to takedown requests.
Failure to act could result in fines or legal liability.
⚠️ 2. Liability for Hosting Infringing Deepfakes
If companies host or distribute deepfakes without consent from the depicted person, they can be held directly responsible, even if the content was uploaded by a user.
This shifts some of the burden away from the creator and onto the platform.
Similar to how copyright liability works for hosting pirated content.
This legislative pressure forces platforms to shift from a largely reactive stance to a more proactive role in content moderation, investing heavily in mechanisms to identify and remove infringing content.
📝 3. No Safe Harbor for AI-generated Likeness Violations
Unlike general user-generated content protections (like in the EU's eCommerce Directive), the law would treat likeness rights more strictly, meaning platforms can't just say, “We didn’t know.”
They may need to verify consent when likeness-based content is uploaded.
Satire and parody are expected to be exempt, but the law places the onus on platforms to assess whether content qualifies.
Navigating the Gray Area
One of the primary challenges for platforms lies in the law's specific wording: it applies only to "realistic, digitally generated imitations." This creates a substantial gray area. Distinguishing between a parody, an artistic interpretation, and a "realistic" imitation will require sophisticated detection tools and nuanced judgment on a massive scale.
🎭 What Counts as “Realistic”?
The law doesn't clearly define what qualifies as “realistic.”
Does a stylized cartoon of a person count? What about a semi-photo-realistic AI-generated face?
This opens the door to subjective interpretation, which creates uncertainty for platforms trying to comply.
Platforms will need to develop advanced AI-driven solutions to identify and categorize such content, potentially leading to a new arms race in content moderation technology.
Reclaiming Identity as a Commodity
In essence, the Danish AI law, if eventually passed, will herald the dawn of a new era where a person's identity and performance are formally recognized as valuable commodities that can be owned, controlled, and protected. This legislative move represents a significant pushback against the long-standing internet ethos of free and often unconstrained use of public data. It gives individuals the power to take back control of their digital identity, ensuring they have a say in how their unique features are used, particularly as generative AI technology continues to advance.
Reference:
https://www.fastcompany.com/91360589/denmark-copyright-yourself-it-might-be-the-only-way-to-stop-deepfakes
https://lsj.com.au/articles/denmark-proposes-copyright-laws-to-protect-against-deepfakes/
https://winsomemarketing.com/ai-in-marketing/in-denmark-you-own-the-copyright-of-your-face
https://kromannreumert.com/en/news/fighting-deepfakes-through-the-danish-copyright-act
https://vlaa.org/ai-identity-and-the-right-of-publicity/
https://business.cch.com/ipld/SP_AI-voice-cloning_6-20-2024_locked.pdf
https://www.designrush.com/news/denmark-signals-to-us-brands-ai-deepfakes-might-soon-cost-you