The state publicity-law map for AI voice and likeness

There is no general federal right of publicity in the United States. Whether an identifiable person’s voice or likeness can be used to train a model or generate a replica is governed by state law — most states recognize some form of the right by statute or common law, and since 2024 a short list of states has enacted statutes that name AI directly. Four matter most for AI voice and likeness work. Tennessee reaches AI voice cloning for any individual. California polices both digital-replica contracts with living performers and replicas of deceased personalities. Illinois pairs a digital-replica publicity right with the country’s toughest biometric-consent statute. New York voids under-negotiated digital-replica contract clauses and protects deceased performers. This page maps what each statute actually says, with effective dates, because the differences decide what a valid consent looks like.

Why it matters to a buyer

The tempting shortcut is one consent form for the whole country. It fails because liability follows the person and the use, not your headquarters: the speaker’s domicile, the place of harm, and the forum all matter, and plaintiffs choose the friendliest. The specifics are where deals break. Tennessee’s ELVIS Act reaches not just unauthorized simulation but making cloning technology available. California’s AB 2602 makes a contract provision unenforceable if the replica use lacked a reasonably specific description or the performer lacked counsel or union representation — which means a signed form can still be void. Illinois adds per-person statutory damages for voiceprints collected without written release under BIPA, and public availability of the audio is not a defense. New York voids the same under-negotiated clauses for contracts entered into from 2025. Nor should buyers wait for federal preemption to simplify the map: the pending NO FAKES Act would preempt future state digital-replica laws but expressly preserves state causes of action that existed as of January 2, 2025 — which is precisely the list on this page. Diligence therefore asks, for every identifiable person in a corpus: where are they, what did they sign, was the intended use described specifically, and were they represented when the law says representation matters.

Why it matters to a data owner

If you are licensing recordings of identifiable people, draft the consent to the strictest regime it may ever meet, not the friendliest. In practice that means a separate signed writing, not a clause buried in a services agreement; a reasonably specific description of the intended AI uses, because California and New York void vague grants when the person was unrepresented; explicit coverage of voice, because Tennessee treats voice as a protected property right for every individual, not just celebrities; and written-release language that satisfies BIPA if any voiceprint processing could occur, since Illinois damages are statutory and per person. For estates and catalogs, note that California’s AB 1836 and New York’s Section 50-f both condition digital replicas of deceased personalities and performers on estate consent — post-mortem rights are now a licensable asset with a statute behind them in the two biggest entertainment states. A consent file built this way survives any single state’s scrutiny, and it is what buyers’ counsel now ask to see before a voice or likeness dataset clears.

Current legal status

Five regimes, verified as of July 2026. Tennessee: the ELVIS Act, in effect since July 1, 2024, amended the Personal Rights Protection Act to make voice a protected property right for any individual, to cover unauthorized AI simulation, and to impose liability for making cloning technology available for unauthorized use. California: AB 2602, effective January 1, 2025 and applicable to performances fixed on or after that date, makes a contract provision unenforceable where it allows a digital replica of a performer’s voice or likeness in place of work the performer would have done in person, lacks a reasonably specific description of the intended uses, and the performer was not represented by counsel or a labor union. AB 1836, also effective January 1, 2025, makes producing or distributing a digital replica of a deceased personality’s voice or likeness in an expressive audiovisual work or sound recording without estate consent liable for the greater of $10,000 or actual damages. Illinois: HB 4875, signed August 9, 2024 and effective January 1, 2025, amended the Right of Publicity Act to cover digital replicas, with liability extending to those who materially contribute to or facilitate violations; separately, BIPA treats voiceprints as biometric identifiers requiring informed written release, and Public Act 103-0769 (effective August 2, 2024) limited recovery to one per person for repeated identical collection while confirming electronic signatures suffice — the statute behind the May 2026 voiceprint class actions against major AI companies. New York: S7676B, signed December 13, 2024, added General Obligations Law Section 5-302, effective January 1, 2025 for contracts entered into or modified from that date, voiding digital-replica provisions that substitute for in-person work where the use was not specifically described and the individual was unrepresented by counsel or a union; Civil Rights Law Section 50-f has provided a cause of action over digital replicas of deceased performers since May 2021, and in December 2025 New York broadened it and added a synthetic-performer disclosure requirement for advertising. Federal: the NO FAKES Act (S. 4591) remains pending; as drafted it would preempt future state digital-replica statutes while preserving causes of action existing as of January 2, 2025, so this map would survive its passage.

What fiund does about it

fiund papers voice and likeness consent separately from the copyright licence, in a signed writing that names AI uses specifically — the form that holds up in the strictest of these states, wherever the buyer or the speaker sits.

Sources

← All rights & provenance guides