IP Risks In AI-Generated Political Likeness Misuse

14 Mar 2026 --
0 Comments

1. Right of Publicity and AI-Generated Political Likenesses

The right of publicity allows individuals to control the commercial use of their name, image, or likeness. Misusing AI to create fake political content can infringe this right.

Case 1: White v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., 1993 (9th Cir.)

Facts: Samsung ran an ad showing a robot dressed like Vanna White, resembling her iconic TV persona.
Ruling: Court recognized right of publicity even without direct use of her name or photograph; likeness alone sufficed.
Relevance to AI: AI-generated images of politicians used in ads or endorsements could violate the same principle—no actual photograph needed if the likeness is recognizable.

Case 2: Hart v. Electronic Arts Inc., 2013 (9th Cir.)

Facts: College athletes sued EA Sports for using their likenesses in video games without permission.
Ruling: Court held it violated right of publicity; EA argued First Amendment defense, but the commercial nature of the game outweighed it.
AI Implication: Generating AI political avatars for commercial or promotional purposes without consent could similarly constitute right of publicity infringement.

2. Defamation and Misrepresentation

AI-generated likenesses can create false statements, leading to defamation claims if the image portrays a politician in a harmful false context.

Case 3: Masson v. New Yorker Magazine, 1991 (US Supreme Court)

Facts: Writer fabricated quotes attributed to Masson; the court considered whether alteration of words was materially false.
Ruling: Misrepresentation of statements can constitute defamation even if contextually similar.
AI Link: Deepfake AI videos showing politicians saying or endorsing something false can trigger defamation claims.

3. Copyright and AI Use of Original Works

AI-generated content may involve training on copyrighted images, raising copyright infringement risks.

Case 4: Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp., 1999 (SDNY)

Facts: Corel copied public domain art images from Bridgeman’s high-resolution photos.
Ruling: Exact photographic reproductions of public domain works were not copyrightable; originality required.
AI Link: Using copyrighted political photos as AI training data may violate copyright if the AI outputs images that reproduce copyrighted elements too closely.

Case 5: Naruto v. Slater, 2018 (9th Cir.)

Facts: A monkey took a selfie; court ruled non-human entities cannot hold copyright.
AI Link: Raises question: can AI-generated images be copyrighted? Courts may rule AI itself cannot own copyright, but human developers may. Misuse of AI likeness may therefore rely more on publicity and defamation laws rather than copyright alone.

4. Trademark and Political Campaign Symbols

Politicians’ campaign logos or slogans can be trademarked. Using AI-generated likenesses alongside logos can lead to trademark infringement or dilution.

Case 6: L.L. Bean, Inc. v. Drake Publishers, 1967

Facts: L.L. Bean challenged unauthorized commercial use of its name in publications.
Ruling: Using a protected mark for commercial purposes without authorization violated trademark rights.
AI Implication: Generating AI political ads that falsely suggest endorsement using a politician’s logo or symbol could constitute trademark infringement.

5. Emerging Legal Frameworks for AI-Generated Political Likenesses

California AB 602: Prohibits unauthorized deepfake videos of politicians within 60 days of an election.
Illinois Right of Publicity (Civil Code 765 ILCS 1075/): Protects likeness and image against commercial exploitation without consent.

AI-generated content may thus violate multiple legal layers: right of publicity, defamation, copyright, and trademark, depending on the context.

Key Takeaways

Commercial misuse of AI-generated political likenesses is the riskiest legally.
Deepfakes for satire have some First Amendment protections but are context-dependent.
Training AI on copyrighted political images may implicate copyright, especially if outputs closely replicate originals.
Election-period regulations can create additional liabilities for AI-generated misleading content.