Jan 13 • General discussion
AI Video Creation: The Legal Risk Most Creators Miss
Most conversations about AI focus on what the technology can do. Far fewer address what the law will not allow—even when the technology makes it easy.
This is public legal education. Not legal advice. But it reflects settled principles that creators, agencies, and institutions need to understand now.
The Core Legal Risk: Right of Publicity
Creating AI-generated videos that depict real people’s likenesses—actors, athletes, public figures, or private individuals—without permission creates immediate legal exposure.
In more than 30 U.S. states, the Right of Publicity protects against the unauthorized commercial use of a person’s name, image, voice, or likeness.
Key points many people miss:
- Saying “this is AI” does not eliminate liability
- Disclosure is not a defense when content is commercially exploited
- Stylized, fictional, or “creative” depictions can still violate the law
AI capability does not create a legal exception.
Liability Rarely Stops at One Claim
Unauthorized AI depictions often trigger stacked legal exposure, including:
- False endorsement under federal trademark law
- Defamation, where content implies false conduct or beliefs
- Emotional distress, particularly when viewers are misled
These claims compound. They do not cancel one another out.
Without Permission: High Exposure
When AI content uses real people or recognizable characters without authorization, risk expands across multiple legal regimes:
Copyright Training on or outputting recognizable copyrighted images, performances, or scenes—especially for commercial use—rarely qualifies as fair use.
Trademark Depicting branded characters or universes can imply endorsement, triggering infringement or dilution claims.
State Right of Publicity Laws Jurisdictions such as California, New York, and Tennessee allow statutory damages, injunctions, profit disgorgement, and post-mortem rights that extend decades after death.
Emerging Federal Law Proposed legislation would create nationwide civil liability for unauthorized digital replicas.
Disclosure requirements in some states may add penalties—but disclosure does not cure the violation.
With Permission: Minimal Risk
Risk changes dramatically when permissions are handled correctly.
Best practices include:
- Written releases from individuals or estates
- Proper licensing from copyright and trademark owners
- Model releases for non-celebrity subjects
- Clear disclosures as transparency—not as a legal shield
For limited, non-commercial, or transformative uses, careful structuring may strengthen First Amendment defenses—but restraint matters.
The Takeaway
AI makes creation easier. It does not make ownership optional.
If your work involves real people, recognizable identities, or valuable brands, the question is no longer:
“Can this be generated?”
The real question is:
“Who owns the rights—and do I have permission?”
Education protects people long before disputes begin.
Dr. Fred Jones, Esq.
Attorney & The Worthologist™
Public Legal Education on AI, Ownership, and Human Worth
1
2 comments
AI Video Creation: The Legal Risk Most Creators Miss
powered by
skool.com/copyright-trademark-watch-9053
A private, invitation-only author network for aspiring and established bestsellers focused on strategy, AI publishing, launches, and IP ownership.
Suggested communities
Powered by