Copyrighting Individuals Faces And Voices: Demark's Response To AI And Deepfake Risks

What Are Deepfakes And Why Are They A Privacy Threat?

Deepfakes are creating havoc across the globe, spreading fake news and pornography, being used to steal identities, exploiting celebrities, scamming ordinary people and even influencing elections. Yet a recent worldwide survey found 71% of people have no idea what deepfakes are, and as far as these people are concerned, they believe in everything they see, unable to differentiate between what is real and what is fake. In 2024, roughly 26% of people came by a deep-fake scam online, with 9% falling victim to them. Furthermore, it is observed that "Face swaps" are among the most common deepfake categories, with a 704% increase from the first to the latter half of 2023.

We have all probably seen a deepfake video or photo without even realising it. Computer-generated images and videos of famous personalities like Tom Cruise, Donald Trump and Mark Zuckerberg have been circulating on the internet for several years, but what started as a bit of harmless fun has now become much more serious.

Appearing recently is a deepfake scam which involves scamming people by using the famous personalities like former US president Barack Obama and French President Emmanuel Macron. There are multiple cases which we are hearing on everyday basis, for instance, the latest news wherein US secretary of state Marco Rubio has turned out to be the victim as his impostor sent fake voice messages and texts mimicking his voice and writing style to at least five senior officials including three foreign ministers, a US governor and a Congress member. Furthermore, earlier this year, it was found that around 4000 celebrities have become victims of using their identity for pornography as a part of the Adult deep-fake content being circulated. There are multiple such cases that are being observed where all these people are the victims.

In the rising world of Artificial Intelligence (AI) today, what we see is a world slowing slipping away in the hands of AI. On one hand, when we are fighting for Right to Privacy from the states and people, on the other hand, we forget that our privacy is being violated from misuse of AI tools, such as Deepfake. How right is it that there are fake videos of us and the people we know are being generated by AI and are being circulated across social media platforms without our consent? Isn't that a violation of our right to privacy and our identity in society?

Every Individual in the world must have their fundamental rights such as Right to Privacy and most important and most relevant today is the Right to their own Identity.

To curb this worldwide issue, Denmark becomes the first country to take any action against this issue by providing the Right to protect an individual's Voice and faces by granting them Copyrights.

How Does Denmark's Copyright Law Protect Against AI Deepfakes?

Firstly, Copyright is a form of intellectual property that gives creators exclusive rights over their original works, like books, music, and software. It prevents unauthorized copying, distribution, and other uses of the work for a specific period. How does this help in reducing the circulation of the Fake AI generated videos, faces and voices?

Denmark has formulated a significant change to its copyright law, allowing its citizens to secure rights over their faces, voices and even likenesses to tackle the ongoing issue with deepfakes will allow citizens to sue AI companies offering deepfake technologies if they think that the Deepfake technology have copyrighted their personality and identity.

On 26^th June 2025, The Danish Ministry announced a proposal to amend the Copyright Act prohibiting unauthorized sharing of realistic, digitally generated imitations of personal characteristics. Minister of Culture Jakob Engel Schmidt said that "We must not accept that we humans can simply smoke in the digital copier and be abused for all sorts of purposes. Technology is developing rapidly, and in the future, it will be even more difficult to distinguish reality from fiction in the digital world. Therefore, it is high time that we created a safeguard against the spread of misinformation and at the same time send a clear signal to the tech giants."

Exceptions to this, as stated by Anderson, the Socialist Party's Group Chairwoman, is that Parodies (comedic commentary about a work, that requires an imitation of the work) and Satire (the art of making someone or something look ridiculous, raising laughter in order to embarrass, humble, or discredit its targets) are still allowed.

Copyright Law in Denmark is now said to protect both Personal Characteristics and Artistic Performances, which is used without their consent. It ensures that such content is removed from different storage media. In case of Violation, a Compensation is given to the victims.

Global Impact Of Denmark's Deepfake Law

The proposed amendment has seen a lot of positive comments from across the world. By introducing this, Denmark hopes that other European countries adopt similar laws to put an end to this issue.

However, The US is also working on a similar initiative. The NO FAKES (Nurture Originals, Foster Art, and Keep Entertainment Safe) Act was reintroduced in the US Senate in April, brought forward by a bipartisan group of senators. The bill effectively creates a right of publicity at the US federal level for the first time: individuals will be able to control the use of their own likeness and voice.

Challenges And Recommendations

Challenges

Though introduction of copyright laws for protection of individuals identity rights is seen as a positive initiative to tackle the issue, there are still some challenges that need our attention. One of them is the legal complexity in granting copyright protection.

Copyright law traditionally protects Works and not people – Copyright law is designed to protect individuals' original works such as artistic and literary works and music; it does not cover a person's identity or voice. These are inherent personality traits and not something which is created by an individual. Granting such copyright control makes the entire concept of copyright blurry.
Enforcement of the Copyright act – As mentioned earlier, this act will only be applicable in Denmark. Deepfakes are often hosted outside of Denmark, even though through local jurisdiction these deepfakes are taken down, on global tech platforms it will still be present. Since there is no uniform law in place to curb such a global issue, this can cause friction with international speech norms.
Burden of proof on the victims – Victims of such deepfakes being circulated discover harmful content late. When they detect it, it is still a complex issue as the burden of proof lies on the Victims to prove that it is a deepfake video or a photo or a voice note of them, which can be expensive and procedurally complex. The Statistical data collected in 2022 show that while 57% of people can spot deep-fake videos, 43% can't differentiate between altered and authentic content. This raises huge concerns regarding the enforcement of this amendment. It also raises concerns about how accurately the AI content can be distinguished from the Real content.
Exceptions of Parody and Satire are not absolute – While Parody and Satire are said to be the essentials for Right to Freedom of Speech and expression, it also blurs the lines between a parody and a deepfake. This becomes very subjective, what one person finds as a parody, can become an offensive statement to the other.
There is also a risk that powerful individuals may misuse the law to avoid criticisms or media reporting and can potentially lead to Self-censorship on online platforms.

Recommendation

Instead of granting copyright Denmark can come up with a separate law to tackle such issue.
Promote intergovernmental Cooperation – Denmark should work with the European Union to come up with a shared framework to protect individuals from AI generated deepfakes.
Denmark must come up with tests to determine when the exception of parody and satire apply. This could include assessing the purposes of the content and its potential impact on the individuals.
To prevent misuse of such law by political personalities or powerful actors, the courts must ensure there is strict regulations in place before taking down them.
Ensure that when the copyright of the individual's personality is infringed along with compensation there are also fines which must be paid by the infringers who create and spread such deep-fake material.
The tech giants who have the AI generation platforms also ensure that the deep-fake material is not harming an individual's identity. For instance, YouTube recently said that it will not entertain any AI generated content which will be posted online on its platform.

Does India Have Any Deepfake Protection Law?

In India, while some individuals are advocating for the implementation of a similar act, the experts in the field of cybersecurity are worried about the complexities of implementing such a law in a country as large and diverse as India.

Unlike Denmark, India's existing laws offer a partial protection for People's faces and voices. The existing laws provide indirect protection to the person's voice and face. Indian Laws include the following –

Constitutional Protection under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution which guarantees the Right to Privacy, as upheld in the landmark case of K. Puttaswamy V. Union of India.

Under the Information technology Act, 2000, Section 66Ep enalizes capturing or publishing images of a person's private parts without consent. As per Section 79, Intermediary platforms must take down harmful content when notified.

TheDigital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023 recognizes biometric data as sensitive personal data. Protection of this sensitive data is only applicable when the data is processed by a data fiduciary like a company or an organization.

Right to Publicity, has 2 facets to it. Firstly, the right to protect one's image from being commercially exploited without permission, by treating it as tort of passing off; and second, the right to privacy which entails one's right to be left alone. Landmark cases such as Titan V. Ramkumar Jewelers and ICC Development and Arvee Enterprises have protected celebrities from misuse of their image for commercial purposes.

However, these laws do not provide direct protection over a person's face or voice, especially in the context of AI generated content like Deepfakes and impersonations. While the Right to Privacy under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, recognizes Right to personal identity and bodily autonomy, it does not protect an individual's Face or Voice alone, which is much needed in this digital era. Furthermore, the Sections of the IT Act apply mostly to sexual content or privacy breaches, and the DPDP Act focuses on data sensitivity and does not provide protection for the potential misuse of personal images by AI. Furthermore, in the case of Right to Publicity, it does not help in protecting regular citizens or non-commercial cases like the deep fakes or AI generated impersonations.

While India does need stricter laws to protect individuals from misuse of their faces and voices, using the copyright law, like Denmark, may not be the right approach. Copyright is meant for creative works and not to protect biological traits. If India treated individuals' identity as Copyrights, it could lead to complexities in terms of the procedures and granting of licenses to the individual's identity. Copyrights include ownership transfer and can be granted only for a certain duration which cannot be applied to something as personal as non-transferability as one's identity.

Instead of treating Right to Personal identity as Copyrights, India should ensure that this Right is also covered under Article 21, that provides for Right to Life and Personal Liberty. India needs a targeted legal solution to tackle this issue.

Conclusion

Denmark's new Law is a good initiative to tackle the issue of Protecting individuals' identity against the deep fakes scam. The Act ensures that not only is the Individuals Right to Privacy protected but also ensures that the Individuals' identity, face and voice are also protected. While the goal is clear, it raises complex questions about how copyright principles apply to human features and what kind of boundaries must be set. In India, where the existing laws already provides partial protection to one's voice and face, there is space to build more precise and balanced protection, not through copyright. The way forward, to make the law effective, Denmark must create a balance between protecting an individual right to their own personality from Misuse of the AI tools such as Deepfake, by developing clear and effective laws, and ensuring that it is implemented on a global scale.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Q1.How can I tell if a video or audio is a deepfake?

Deepfakes are increasingly realistic, but signs like unnatural facial expressions, mismatched audio, inconsistent lighting, and abrupt movements can signal manipulation. Fact-checking and using dedicated detection tools can help verify authenticity.

Q2.What should I do if my face or voice is used without consent in a deepfake?

You should contact the platform hosting the content to request removal, consider lodging a complaint with relevant authorities, and, in countries with specific deepfake or copyright laws (like Denmark), pursue legal action for takedown and compensation.

Q3.Are there any global laws protecting people from deepfakes?

Legal protections vary widely. The EU has introduced the AI Act, the US is debating the NO FAKES Act, and Denmark is pioneering copyright protection for personal identity. However, most countries still rely on broader copyright, privacy, or defamation laws, and enforcement remains a challenge.

Q4.Who is liable for harmful deepfakes: platforms, creators, or AI developers?

Liability depends on jurisdiction, intent, and platform policies. Some countries aim to hold both creators and platforms accountable, while others have less clear standards for AI-generated content.

Q5.Does creating a deepfake for personal use break the law?

Legality depends on intent and context. Using deepfakes for private, non-malicious purposes might not be illegal, but distributing, impersonating, or causing harm can trigger legal consequences in many countries.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.