Why Are Voice Cloning Technologies Creating Legal Challenges?
AI voice cloning technologies can now replicate human voices with remarkable accuracy using just seconds of audio samples. Companies like ElevenLabs, Descript, and others offer services generating synthetic speech indistinguishable from real human voices. While these technologies enable valuable applications including accessibility tools for speech-impaired individuals, multilingual content creation, and entertainment production, they also create serious legal risks involving unauthorized voice replication and commercial exploitation, impersonation and fraud, right of publicity violations, and defamation through fabricated statements.
High-profile incidents including AI-generated robocalls mimicking political candidates, synthetic voices used in financial scams, and unauthorized celebrity voice cloning for commercial products demonstrate emerging legal battlegrounds. For companies developing or deploying voice AI technologies, understanding legal frameworks governing voice rights, implementing appropriate safeguards, and complying with emerging regulations is essential for avoiding liability while enabling legitimate innovation.
Right of Publicity for Voice
Legal Framework
The right of publicity protects individuals’ control over commercial use of their identity including name, image, likeness, and voice. While primarily state-law based, right of publicity principles are widely recognized across jurisdictions with varying scope and protections.
Voice specifically receives protection under right of publicity laws. Courts have recognized that distinctive voices constitute protectable aspects of identity, particularly for public figures and celebrities whose voices have commercial value.
Elements of Voice Publicity Claims
Successful right of publicity claims for voice misappropriation typically require that defendant used plaintiff’s voice or recognizable imitation, for commercial purposes or advantage, without authorization or consent, and causing harm or damages.
For AI voice cloning, key questions include whether synthetic voices constitute “use” of someone’s voice, whether listeners would recognize the voice as the individual’s, and whether technical differences defeat claims if voices are substantially similar.
Celebrity vs. Non-Celebrity Rights
Celebrities generally have stronger right of publicity protections due to established commercial value in their voices, broader geographic scope of rights, and longer post-mortem protection in some states.
However, non-celebrities also possess publicity rights, though commercial value may be harder to establish and damages typically lower.
State Right of Publicity Laws
California Protections
California Civil Code Section 3344 and common law provide robust right of publicity protections including voice among protected attributes, commercial use requirement, damages including profits and statutory damages, and post-mortem rights for deceased personalities.
California courts have found liability for voice imitations even without using actual recordings when imitations are recognizable and used commercially.
New York Protections
New York Civil Rights Law Sections 50 and 51 protect against unauthorized commercial use of name, portrait, or picture. Courts have extended protection to voice in certain contexts.
Tennessee ELVIS Act
Tennessee recently enacted the Ensuring Likeness Voice and Image Security (ELVIS) Act specifically addressing AI-generated replicas of individuals’ voices and likenesses. The law prohibits unauthorized use of AI to replicate voices for commercial purposes and provides civil remedies for violations.
This represents one of the first state laws explicitly addressing AI voice cloning.
Federal Legal Frameworks
Lanham Act and False Endorsement
Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act prohibits false designation of origin or false endorsement. Unauthorized use of someone’s voice in advertising may constitute false endorsement if it implies the person endorses products or services.
This federal cause of action complements state right of publicity claims and applies nationwide.
FTC Deceptive Practices
The FTC can pursue enforcement against deceptive or unfair practices involving AI voice technologies including misleading consumers about endorsements, impersonating real individuals in commercial contexts, or failing to disclose AI-generated content.
Consent and Licensing Requirements
Obtaining Voice Rights
Companies using real voices for training AI models or creating voice clones should obtain explicit written consent covering specific uses and purposes, compensation terms if commercial use is contemplated, duration and scope of authorization, and whether consent is exclusive or non-exclusive.
Consent should be informed, meaning individuals understand how their voices will be used.
Work-for-Hire Considerations
Voice recordings created by employees within employment scope may constitute work-made-for-hire owned by employers. However, the individual’s publicity rights in their voice may persist separately from copyright in recordings.
Employment agreements should address both copyright ownership and publicity rights waivers where appropriate.
Posthumous Rights
Many states recognize post-mortem right of publicity lasting decades after death. Using deceased individuals’ voices requires authorization from estates or heirs.
This creates complexity for historical voices or voices of deceased celebrities.
Defamation and False Light
Synthetic Voices Making False Statements
Using AI to generate speech in someone’s voice making false factual statements may constitute defamation if statements harm reputation, are published to third parties, and are false.
Synthetic voice makes attribution clear, potentially strengthening defamation claims by definitively linking statements to the individual whose voice is cloned.
Defenses and Limitations
Truth is an absolute defense to defamation. Opinion receives First Amendment protection. Public figures face higher burdens proving defamation, requiring actual malice.
However, synthetic voices fabricating statements of purported fact likely overcome these defenses.
Fraud and Impersonation
Criminal Liability
Using synthetic voices to impersonate individuals for fraud, identity theft, or other criminal purposes violates various criminal statutes including fraud statutes, identity theft laws, and wire fraud provisions.
Law enforcement increasingly encounters AI voice scams targeting elderly victims or financial fraud.
Civil Fraud Claims
Victims of voice cloning fraud can pursue civil claims for fraud, negligence against AI providers enabling fraud, unjust enrichment, and violation of state consumer protection laws.
Emerging AI Voice Regulations
State Legislation
Beyond Tennessee’s ELVIS Act, numerous states are considering legislation addressing AI-generated voices and likenesses including requirements to disclose AI-generated audio, restrictions on deepfake political content, and enhanced penalties for voice cloning fraud.
Federal Proposals
Congress has proposed federal legislation addressing synthetic media including the NO FAKES Act providing federal right of publicity for voice and likeness, requirements for watermarking or disclosure of AI-generated content, and safe harbors for platforms implementing detection and removal systems.
Platform Policies
Major platforms including YouTube, Meta, and TikTok have implemented policies requiring disclosure of AI-generated content, prohibiting harmful deepfakes and impersonation, and providing removal mechanisms for unauthorized use of voice or likeness.
Safeguards for Voice AI Developers
Consent Verification Systems
Implement robust systems verifying consent before allowing voice cloning including identity verification of voice owners, documentation of authorization scope, and periodic reconfirmation for ongoing uses.
Use Restrictions and Monitoring
Prohibit and enforce against uses for fraud, impersonation, defamation without authorization, political deepfakes without disclosure, and non-consensual intimate content.
Monitor platform usage and respond to abuse reports promptly.
Watermarking and Attribution
Consider technical measures including audio watermarking identifying synthetic voices, metadata tracking voice origins, and disclosure mechanisms informing listeners of AI generation.
Licensing Models for Voice Technologies
Voice Actor Licensing
Some platforms connect voice actors with users seeking licensed voice clones. Licensing agreements should specify permitted use cases and restrictions, compensation models (flat fees, royalties, usage-based), quality control and approval rights, and term and termination provisions.
Celebrity Voice Licensing
Licensing celebrity voices requires negotiating with talent representatives, addressing exclusivity and competitive restrictions, defining approval processes for content, and structuring compensation reflecting market value.
International Considerations
EU Rights
The EU recognizes personality rights protecting voice under various national laws and GDPR. Using voices of EU residents requires legal bases under GDPR and compliance with national personality rights laws.
Moral Rights
Some jurisdictions recognize moral rights protecting personal and reputational interests beyond economic rights, which may restrict voice manipulation even with economic authorization.
Insurance and Risk Management
Voice AI companies should obtain appropriate insurance covering right of publicity claims, defamation and false light allegations, fraud and impersonation liability, and errors and omissions for service failures.
Insurance can transfer significant risk but doesn’t replace robust preventive measures.
Conclusion: Balancing Innovation and Protection
Voice cloning technologies offer tremendous benefits but require careful legal compliance. Companies must obtain appropriate consents and licenses, implement use restrictions and monitoring, comply with emerging voice-specific regulations, and provide transparency about AI-generated audio.
As regulation evolves, proactive approaches to responsible voice AI development will enable innovation while respecting individuals’ rights in their voices.
Contact Rock LAW PLLC for Voice AI Legal Counsel
At Rock LAW PLLC, we help companies navigate legal issues with voice cloning and AI audio technologies.
We assist with:
- Right of publicity compliance and licensing
- Voice consent and authorization agreements
- Platform terms of service and content policies
- Regulatory compliance for synthetic media
- Defamation and fraud risk mitigation
- Defense of publicity rights claims
Contact us for guidance on legal compliance for voice AI technologies.
Related Articles:
- Legal Risks of AI Deepfakes and Synthetic Media
- Who Owns AI-Generated Content?
- Liability for AI Model Providers
Rock LAW PLLC
Business Focused. Intellectual Property Driven.
www.rock.law/