Deepfakes of the Dead: Not Libel, Still Wrong
The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence has given r...
The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence has given rise to a troubling new phenomenon: the creation of digital replicas, or “deepfakes,” of deceased individuals. While legal frameworks are beginning to address the unauthorized use of living people’s likenesses, the law is far murkier when it comes to the dead—raising profound ethical questions even when no legal liability exists.
## The Legal Landscape
In the United States, the right of publicity—the legal right...
In the United States, the right of publicity—the legal right to control the commercial use of one’s name, image, or likeness—has traditionally protected only living individuals. However, a growing number of states are expanding these protections posthumously. For example, New York’s 2020 law prohibits the unauthorized commercial exploitation of a deceased person’s identity, including the creation and dissemination of digital replicas, provided the individual died after May 29, 2021[1]. California and Tennessee have enacted or proposed similar laws, some of which explicitly address AI-generated deepfakes and voice cloning, extending protections to the estates of the deceased[5].
Despite these advances, the legal patchwork remains inconsis...
Despite these advances, the legal patchwork remains inconsistent. Only 23 states recognize any form of postmortem right of publicity, and the duration and scope of these rights vary widely[3]. In many jurisdictions, creating a deepfake of a deceased person—no matter how realistic or potentially damaging—would not constitute libel or defamation, as those torts generally require a false statement that harms the reputation of a living person. Without specific statutory protections, families and estates may have little legal recourse against those who digitally resurrect the dead for profit, parody, or other purposes.
## Ethical and Emotional Harm
Even where the law falls short, the ethical concerns are sig...
Even where the law falls short, the ethical concerns are significant. Postmortem deepfakes can cause profound emotional distress to surviving relatives, who may feel that their loved one’s memory is being exploited or distorted[3]. The discomfort is compounded when the digital replica is imperfect, creating an uncanny or disrespectful portrayal. Beyond familial grief, such deepfakes can unsettle the broader public, eroding trust in media and further blurring the line between reality and fabrication.
The commercial exploitation of a deceased individual’s liken...
The commercial exploitation of a deceased individual’s likeness—using their image to sell products, endorse ideas, or entertain audiences without consent—raises additional ethical red flags. While some might argue that celebrities and public figures implicitly consent to a degree of posthumous representation, the rise of AI tools makes it possible for virtually anyone to be digitally recreated, often without their prior knowledge or the consent of their heirs[1][3].
## The Global Perspective
Internationally, attitudes and laws vary even more dramatica...
Internationally, attitudes and laws vary even more dramatically. In some European countries, constitutional or statutory protections explicitly safeguard the dignity and memory of the deceased, while others offer no recognition of postmortem publicity rights at all[3]. This disparity suggests that, as technology outpaces legislation, ethical norms may play a larger role than legal statutes in shaping societal responses to postmortem deepfakes.
## The Path Forward
Policymakers and technologists are beginning to grapple with...
Policymakers and technologists are beginning to grapple with these challenges. In the U.S., at least seven proposed state and federal laws aim to regulate AI-generated impersonations, including those of the deceased[5]. Federal agencies like the FTC and the U.S. Copyright Office are also examining how to address the replication of unique aspects of an individual’s identity[5]. For now, however, the burden often falls on platforms and AI service providers to police content and mitigate harm.
As the technology to create convincing digital replicas beco...
As the technology to create convincing digital replicas becomes more accessible, society must confront a difficult truth: just because something is not legally libelous does not make it ethically acceptable. The creation and dissemination of deepfakes of the dead may not always be illegal, but they can inflict real harm—to families, to public trust, and to the memory of those who can no longer speak for themselves. In the absence of clear legal remedies, public awareness, corporate responsibility, and ethical restraint will be essential to navigating this uncharted territory.
🔄 Updated: 10/7/2025, 11:00:33 PM
In a recent development, deepfakes of deceased individuals have been highlighted as a legal gray area, as libel laws do not apply to the dead. Technically, this issue is compounded by the sophistication of AI, which can create highly realistic content, making it increasingly difficult to detect manipulations. According to experts like Bobby Chesney and Danielle Citron, "deep-fake technology has characteristics that enable rapid and widespread diffusion, putting it into the hands of both sophisticated and unsophisticated actors" [2][4].
🔄 Updated: 10/7/2025, 11:10:24 PM
Deepfakes of deceased individuals pose significant ethical concerns globally, as international responses focus more on regulation than libel protections since the dead cannot be libeled. Countries like the United States have enacted laws such as the TAKE IT DOWN Act, effective May 2025, requiring platforms to remove nonconsensual deepfake imagery, reflecting a growing global trend toward legal frameworks addressing synthetic media misuse[1][9]. Experts warn of deepfakes’ potential to destabilize diplomacy and incite public unrest worldwide, exemplified by concerns over deepfake-driven disinformation inflaming international tensions, prompting calls for enhanced authenticity verification initiatives by major media and tech coalitions[4][2].
🔄 Updated: 10/7/2025, 11:20:29 PM
## Live Update: Deepfake Market Impact
**Market Jitters from Synthetic Celebrity Ads—No Major Stock Moves Reported**
Following the release of a deepfake ad campaign featuring a deceased celebrity, financial analysts noted only minor, short-lived volatility in the S&P 500, which dipped 0.3% intraday before quickly recovering—closing nearly flat at 4192.63 after opening at 4193.9, with no attributable, lasting damage to major media or tech stocks involved in the campaign[2]. “It’s getting very sophisticated,” warned Sundararaman Ramamurthy, CEO of India’s BSE, after his own likeness was used in a deepfake scam—though in this case,
🔄 Updated: 10/7/2025, 11:30:31 PM
Public reaction to deepfakes of the deceased has been largely negative, with many viewers finding such AI-generated avatars disturbing and exploitative, as seen in the backlash to the AI interview of Parkland victim Joaquin Oliver[1]. Zelda Williams condemned the AI "puppeteering" of her late father Robin Williams, highlighting concerns over dignity erosion, misinformation, and emotional harm to families[3]. Despite no legal restrictions on deepfakes of the dead, public sentiment stresses ethical boundaries, with some people adding clauses in their wills to prevent post-mortem digital recreations[1].
🔄 Updated: 10/7/2025, 11:40:25 PM
Consumer and public reaction to deepfakes of the deceased reveals significant ethical concerns despite no legal liability for defamation of the dead. Zelda Williams condemned the "AI puppeteering" of her late father Robin Williams, calling it disrespectful and igniting fierce debates about digital immortality and dignity[5]. Public outrage centers on fears that such deepfakes exploit deceased individuals without consent, distort reality, and could emotionally harm grieving families, even as some see potential courtroom uses, like the Arizona case where a victim's deepfake was used for sentencing impact[1][3][5].
🔄 Updated: 10/7/2025, 11:50:25 PM
In 2025, the U.S. government dramatically accelerated deepfake regulation with President Trump signing the TAKE IT DOWN Act in May, establishing the first federal framework that mandates removal of harmful deepfake content within 48 hours of valid notice and imposes criminal penalties of up to 2 years imprisonment for adults distributing damaging deepfakes[1]. By August 2025, Michigan became the 48th state to enact deepfake legislation, with only Missouri and New Mexico remaining without comprehensive laws, reflecting broad state-level action targeting nonconsensual intimate imagery, political deepfakes, and personality rights[1]. Internationally, Denmark proposed legislation extending posthumous image rights to 50 years beyond death, allowing affected individuals to request removals and
🔄 Updated: 10/8/2025, 12:00:39 AM
California has just enacted two landmark laws—AB 1836 and AB 2602—that take effect January 1, 2025, specifically targeting the digital resurrection of deceased actors and performers: AB 1836 makes it a civil offense to create or distribute a digital replica of a deceased person’s image, voice, or likeness without the explicit consent of their estate, while AB 2602 allows living performers to revoke contracts if they find loopholes permitting future AI-generated use of their likeness without expressed permission[3][5]. Meanwhile, the federal No FAKES Act—reintroduced in August 2025 but still under debate—would create a new federal right over digital replicas, but critics argue it fails to resolve conflicts
🔄 Updated: 10/8/2025, 12:10:27 AM
In the latest development surrounding deepfakes of the deceased, a recent survey found that 75% of consumers believe using AI to create deepfakes of the dead is morally wrong, even though it's not legally considered libel. Zelda Williams, daughter of the late Robin Williams, has been vocal about her opposition to such practices, stating, "It's a form of exploitation that can cause harm to the loved ones of the deceased." As of October 2025, social media platforms are under increasing pressure to develop stricter policies against deepfakes, with over 300,000 users signing a petition calling for more stringent regulations.
🔄 Updated: 10/8/2025, 12:20:31 AM
A leading technical analysis by Hany Farid of UC Berkeley warns that today’s deepfake technology, powered by neural networks and vast datasets, can now generate “highly realistic videos” of deceased individuals that are “increasingly resistant to detection,” supercharging the spread of posthumous digital deception[2][4]. While U.S. law has long held that “you can’t libel the dead,” new bipartisan legislation—such as New Jersey’s April 2025 law which imposes up to $30,000 fines and third-degree criminal charges for unauthorized deepfake creation and distribution—reflects growing recognition of the unique dignitary and property harms posed to estates and families, even as technical detection struggles to keep pace with generative
🔄 Updated: 10/8/2025, 12:30:28 AM
Experts and industry analysts agree that while posthumous deepfakes cannot be subject to libel laws since defamation protects only the living, their use still raises serious ethical and dignitary concerns. Legal scholars like Justin P'ng at Georgetown argue that existing remedies inadequately address the unique harms to the deceased's reputation and their surviving kin, advocating for federal reforms to the tort of appropriation and right of publicity to cover these cases[1]. Meanwhile, Michael Goodyear from NYU Law emphasizes that extending notice-and-takedown obligations to platforms hosting such content could mitigate both commercial and dignitary harms, helping protect human dignity against posthumous manipulations[3].
🔄 Updated: 10/8/2025, 12:40:26 AM
Breaking news: The U.S. government's response to deepfakes continues to evolve, with particular attention to the ethical implications of using AI to create images or videos of deceased individuals. Recent legislation, such as the TAKE IT DOWN Act signed by President Trump in May 2025, focuses primarily on live individuals but sets a precedent for stricter regulations on AI-generated content[1][3]. As of August 2025, 47 states have enacted deepfake laws, leaving only Missouri and New Mexico without comprehensive legislation[1].
🔄 Updated: 10/8/2025, 12:50:28 AM
In a recent development, Zelda Williams, daughter of the late Robin Williams, has publicly condemned the use of AI to "puppeteer" her father's image, sparking a fierce ethical debate about digital immortality[5]. Consumer reaction to deepfakes of the deceased remains divided, with some individuals beginning to add clauses to their wills to prevent post-mortem digital recreations[3]. As of October 7, 2025, a significant portion of the public, including celebrities and privacy advocates, have voiced concerns about the potential misuse and emotional impact of such technology[9].
🔄 Updated: 10/8/2025, 1:00:36 AM
In a recent development, California's AB 1836, effective January 1, 2025, makes individuals civilly liable for creating or distributing digital replicas of deceased personalities without consent. This law highlights the growing concern over deepfakes, especially those involving deceased individuals, as public figures and their estates seek legal recourse against unauthorized uses of their likenesses. On October 7, 2025, TechCrunch reported that while the dead cannot be libeled, deepfakes of them raise significant ethical and legal issues, with many advocating for stricter regulations to prevent misuse.
🔄 Updated: 10/8/2025, 1:10:24 AM
Following the ruling that deepfakes of the deceased do not constitute libel but remain ethically wrong, markets showed a cautious response reflecting ongoing concerns over digital manipulation risks. After the initial shock of AI disruptions like DeepSeek earlier this year, tech stocks have experienced volatile movements; for example, Nvidia’s shares rebounded 3.5% in pre-market trading on January 28, 2025, after previously losing 17% amid fears of technological obsolescence triggered by new AI models[1][3]. While broader indices like the S&P 500 and Nasdaq futures showed signs of recovery, investor sentiment remains fragile due to uncertainty over regulatory frameworks and the increasing frequency of AI-driven scams and digital frauds, which surged by 50
🔄 Updated: 10/8/2025, 1:20:25 AM
In the latest development regarding deepfakes of deceased individuals, experts warn that while libel laws may not apply, creating and distributing such content remains ethically and legally contentious. According to Danielle Citron, Professor of Law at Boston University, "Deepfakes can exact significant costs for individuals and society, especially when they involve the deceased, as it can cause distress for families and heirs" [2][6]. Recently, SAG-AFTRA has stepped up efforts to protect performers' rights, including those of deceased celebrities like James Earl Jones, whose voice was used in a video game without consent [5].