CP-02
Consumer Protection
Non-Consensual Intimate Imagery
Generating, distributing, or facilitating the distribution of non-consensual intimate imagery of real, identifiable individuals using AI tools is prohibited. This applies to developers of image and video generation tools, platforms that distribute such content, and providers of facilitation services. Liability can arise even where the developer does not directly generate the content.
Applies to DeveloperDeployerDistributor Sector General Consumer AppSocial Media
Bills — Enacted
1
unique bills
Bills — Proposed
6
Last Updated
2026-03-29
Core Obligation

Generating, distributing, or facilitating the distribution of non-consensual intimate imagery of real, identifiable individuals using AI tools is prohibited. This applies to developers of image and video generation tools, platforms that distribute such content, and providers of facilitation services. Liability can arise even where the developer does not directly generate the content.

Sub-Obligations4 sub-obligations
Bills That Map This Requirement 7 bills
Bill
Status
Sub-Obligations
Section
Enacted 2026-01-01
CP-02.4
Civ. Code § 3344(a), (f), (g)
Plain Language
SB 11 amends California's right-of-publicity statute to expressly clarify that 'voice' and 'likeness' include AI-generated digital replicas. This means that any person who knowingly uses another person's AI-generated digital replica — on products, merchandise, or for advertising or soliciting purposes — without prior consent is liable under the same framework that has long applied to traditional photographs and voice recordings. Damages are the greater of $750 or actual damages, plus disgorgement of profits, potential punitive damages, and attorney's fees. The amendment does not create a new cause of action but extends the existing right-of-publicity private cause of action to cover AI-generated content. Exemptions exist for news, public affairs, sports broadcasts, and political campaigns (subdivision (c)), and for advertising media owners/employees absent knowledge (subdivision (e)).
(a) Any person who knowingly uses another's name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness, in any manner, on or in products, merchandise, or goods, or for purposes of advertising or selling, or soliciting purchases of, products, merchandise, goods or services, without such person's prior consent, or, in the case of a minor, the prior consent of their parent or legal guardian, shall be liable for any damages sustained by the person or persons injured as a result thereof. In addition, in any action brought under this section, the person who violated the section shall be liable to the injured party or parties in an amount equal to the greater of seven hundred fifty dollars ($750) or the actual damages suffered by them as a result of the unauthorized use, and any profits from the unauthorized use that are attributable to the use and are not taken into account in computing the actual damages. In establishing these profits, the injured party or parties are required to present proof only of the gross revenue attributable to the unauthorized use, and the person who violated this section is required to prove their deductible expenses. Punitive damages may also be awarded to the injured party or parties. The prevailing party in any action under this section shall also be entitled to attorney's fees and costs.
(f) For the purposes of this section, a voice or likeness includes a digital replica, as defined in Section 3344.1.
(g) The remedies provided for in this section are cumulative and shall be in addition to any others provided for by law.
Pending 2026-07-01
CP-02.4
Fla. Stat. § 540.08(2)
Plain Language
No person may commercially publish, print, display, or otherwise publicly use an individual's name, portrait, photograph, image, or other likeness created through generative AI without express written or oral consent from the individual, their authorized representative, or (if deceased) their authorized representative, surviving spouse, or surviving children. This extends Florida's existing right of publicity to AI-generated likenesses. Post-mortem rights apply for 40 years after death (per § 540.08(7)). A news media exemption exists for bona fide news reports that acknowledge the speculative authenticity of AI-generated materials. Violations involving servicemembers carry an additional civil penalty of up to $1,000 per commercial transaction.
A person may not publish, print, display, or otherwise publicly use for trade or for any commercial or advertising purpose the name, portrait, photograph, image, or other likeness of an individual created through generative artificial intelligence without the express written or oral consent to such use given by any of the following: (a) The individual. (b) Any other person authorized in writing by the individual to license the commercial use of the individual's name, image, or likeness. (c) If the individual is deceased: 1. A person authorized in writing to license the commercial use of the individual's name, image, or likeness; or 2. If a person is not authorized, any one individual from a class composed of the deceased individual's surviving spouse and surviving children. A legal parent or guardian may give consent on behalf of a minor surviving child.
Failed 2026-07-01
CP-02.4
Fla. Stat. § 540.08(2)-(3)
Plain Language
No person may commercially publish, display, or use an individual's name, portrait, image, or likeness — whether created through generative AI (subsection 2) or otherwise (subsection 3) — without express consent from the individual, an authorized representative, or (if deceased) an authorized licensee or surviving spouse/child. The AI-specific provision (subsection 2) extends existing right-of-publicity protections to AI-generated likenesses, covering post-mortem rights with a 40-year window after death. Consent may be written or oral. News media exceptions apply, though AI-generated content used in news must include a clear acknowledgment of speculation regarding authenticity. Remedies include injunctive relief, actual damages including reasonable royalty, and punitive or exemplary damages. An additional civil penalty of up to $1,000 per violation applies for unauthorized use of a servicemember's likeness.
(2) A person may not publish, print, display, or otherwise publicly use for trade or for any commercial or advertising purpose the name, portrait, photograph, image, or other likeness of an individual created through generative artificial intelligence without the express written or oral consent to such use given by any of the following: (a) The individual. (b) Any other person authorized in writing by the individual to license the commercial use of the individual's name, image, or likeness. (c) If the individual is deceased: 1. A person authorized in writing to license the commercial use of the individual's name, image, or likeness; or 2. If a person is not authorized, any one individual from a class composed of the deceased individual's surviving spouse and surviving children. A legal parent or guardian may give consent on behalf of a minor surviving child. (3) A person may not publish, print, display or otherwise publicly use for purposes of trade or for any commercial or advertising purpose the name, portrait, photograph, image, or other likeness of an individual without the express written or oral consent to such use given by any of the following: (a) The individual. (b) Any other person authorized in writing by the individual to license the commercial use of the individual's name, image, or likeness. (c) If the individual is deceased: 1. A person authorized in writing to license the commercial use of the deceased individual's name, image, or likeness; or 2. If a person is not authorized, any one individual from a class composed of the individual's surviving spouse and surviving children. A legal parent or guardian may give consent on behalf of a minor surviving child.
Pending 2026-07-01
CP-02.4
O.C.G.A. § 10-1-973(a)-(b), (f)
Plain Language
No person or entity may create, distribute, or commercially exploit a digital replica of an individual's likeness without that individual's express written consent. Consent must be specific — it must affirmatively state the allowance, extent, purpose, and duration of the use. Consent cannot be implied by silence, buried in general terms and conditions, or derived from an unrelated prior agreement. The absence of compensation to the individual does not waive the consent requirement. Liability turns solely on whether consent was obtained, making this a strict consent-based regime with no intent or knowledge element for the initial creation or use.
(a) Creation, distribution, or exploitation of an individual's likeness in a digital replica for commercial purposes requires consent from the individual for such use. (b) Absence of compensation to an individual for the use of his or her likeness shall not negate the requirements of consent under this article. (f) Liability under this article shall only depend on whether or not an individual consented to the use of his or her likeness in a digital replica.
Pending 2026-07-01
CP-02.4
O.C.G.A. § 10-1-973(d)
Plain Language
Once an entity receives notice that an individual did not consent to use of their digital replica, the entity violates the Act if it knowingly continues to distribute or make available that digital replica. This is a notice-and-takedown style obligation — unlike § 10-1-973(a), which imposes strict liability for commercial use without consent, this subsection applies specifically to distributors who receive post-hoc notice and requires a knowledge element (knowingly distributes or continues to make available). Platforms and distributors should implement processes to receive and act on non-consent notices to avoid liability.
(d) After receiving notice that an individual did not consent for the use of a digital replica, any entity that knowingly distributes or continues to make available such digital replica shall be in violation of this article.
Pending 2027-01-01
CP-02.4
O.C.G.A. § 10-1-971(a)-(b)
Plain Language
No individual or production company may publish, display, distribute, transmit, or otherwise make available to the public a digital replica of a performer without that performer's written, specific consent. The prohibition extends beyond direct publication — it also covers distributing or importing a product or service that is primarily designed to produce non-consensual digital replicas of specifically identified performers and has only limited commercially significant purpose beyond that. The consent standard is strict: it must be written, affirmative, and specific as to allowance, extent, purpose, and duration. General terms-of-service acceptance or consent implied by silence does not qualify. The digital replica definition covers both cases where the performer never appeared and cases where the performer's actual appearance has been materially altered.
(a) Any individual or production company that engages in an activity prohibited in subsection (b) of this Code section shall be liable in a civil action brought under this Code section. (b) The following activities shall be prohibited pursuant to this article: (1) The publication, display, distribution, transmission, or communication of, or otherwise making available to the public a digital replica of a performer without his or her consent; or (2) Distributing, importing, transmitting, or otherwise making available to the public a product or service that: (A) Is primarily designed to produce one or more digital replicas of a specifically identified performer or performers without the consent of such performer or performers; and (B) Has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to produce a digital replica of a specifically identified performer or performers without the consent of such performer or performers.
Pending 2027-01-01
CP-02.4
O.C.G.A. § 10-1-971(c)
Plain Language
Any consent contract for use of a performer's digital replica must meet five mandatory requirements to be legally valid: (1) the contract must be in writing and signed by the performer or their authorized representative; (2) it must provide fair compensation; (3) it must prohibit perpetual uncompensated use; (4) it must include a reasonably specific description of the intended use; and (5) while the performer is living, the contract term may not exceed ten years. A contract that fails any of these requirements is invalid, meaning the use would be treated as non-consensual and therefore prohibited. This effectively creates a prescriptive contracting framework — boilerplate or open-ended digital replica licenses will not satisfy the statute.
(c) Consent to use the digital replica of a performer shall be obtained through a contract which: (1) Is valid, while the performer is living, only to the extent that the duration does not exceed ten years; and (2) Shall be valid only if the contract agreement: (A) Is in writing and signed by the performer or an authorized representative of the performer; (B) Provides for fair compensation to the performer for the use of the digital replica; (C) Prohibits the perpetual use of the digital replica without compensation to the performer; and (D) Includes a reasonably specific description of the intended use of the digital replica.
Pending 2027-01-01
CP-02.4
O.C.G.A. § 10-1-972(3)
Plain Language
Production companies must obtain a valid consent contract meeting all the requirements of § 10-1-971(c) — written, signed, fair compensation, ten-year maximum during the performer's lifetime, no perpetual uncompensated use, and reasonably specific intended use description — before using any digital replica of a performer in a production in Georgia. This is a pre-use obligation: the contract must be in place before the digital replica is used, not retroactively obtained.
Any production company deploying artificial intelligence systems for use in production in this state shall: (3) Obtain a contract pursuant to subsection (c) of Code Section 10-1-971 prior to the use of a digital replica of a performer.
Pre-filed 2025-07-01
CP-02.4
§ 554J.3(2)
Plain Language
Deployers may not make publicly available any chatbot that was knowingly designed to impersonate a real person — living or dead — unless they first obtain express permission. For living individuals, permission must come from the person themselves or their legal representative. For deceased individuals, permission must come from whoever is responsible for the estate. A narrow exception exists for deceased individuals with no estate representative: the chatbot may be deployed without permission only if it was designed solely as an educational or research tool, or if a reasonable person would believe it has objective artistic, cultural, or political value. No comparable exception exists for living individuals or for deceased individuals whose estates have a responsible person.
2. A deployer shall not make a chatbot publicly available if the chatbot was knowingly designed to impersonate a real individual, regardless of whether the individual is living or deceased, unless the deployer first obtains permission to impersonate the individual from any of the following: a. For a living individual, from the individual or the individual's legal representative. b. For a deceased individual, from the person responsible for the deceased individual's estate. If no person is responsible for the deceased individual's estate, a deployer may make a chatbot that was designed to knowingly impersonate a deceased individual publicly available without permission if the chatbot was designed solely as an educational or research tool or if a reasonable person would believe the chatbot has objective artistic, cultural, or political value.
Pending 2026-01-08
CP-02.4
Gen. Bus. Law § 390-f(2)
Plain Language
Within 60 days of receiving notice from a public officeholder or candidate (or their authorized agent) that they do not want realistic depictions of themselves generated, the owner, licensee, or operator of a covered generative AI system must implement a reasonable method to prevent users from creating such depictions. A method is deemed reasonable if it is consistent with industry standards, not overly burdensome on the system, cost-effective to implement and maintain, and up to date. This is a notice-triggered obligation — there is no duty to proactively block depictions of public officials absent notice. The 60-day window begins upon receipt of notice, not upon enactment.
2. The owner, licensee or operator of a visual or audio generative artificial intelligence system shall implement a reasonable method to prohibit its users from creating unauthorized realistic depictions of a covered person within sixty days of being notified by such covered person that such covered person does not want a realistic depiction of themselves to be generated by the owner, licensee or operator's system. An implemented method to prevent the unauthorized creation of realistic depictions of a covered person shall be considered reasonable when the owner, licensee or operator of the covered system has implemented a method that, in relation to the method of user inputs used by the covered system, is consistent with industry standards, not overly burdensome on the system, cost-effective to implement and maintain and is up to date.
Pending 2026-01-08
CP-02.3
Gen. Bus. Law § 390-f(3)
Plain Language
Operators must provide a notice intake mechanism that covered persons (public officials, candidates, or their authorized agents) can use to request that their likeness be blocked from generation. The mechanism must be easy to access, understand, complete, and submit. Operators must also provide timely status updates on each request. Operators may require reasonable identification to verify the requester's identity. This is an infrastructure obligation — it must be in place regardless of whether any covered person has yet submitted a notice.
3. The owner, licensee or operator of a covered system shall implement a reasonable method for covered persons to send notice to them under this section provided that such method is easy to access, understand, complete and send and that such method provides clear updates to the sender on the status of their request in a timely manner. The owner, licensee or operator of a covered system may request a reasonable means of identification to process such requests.
Pending 2026-01-08
CP-02.4
Gen. Bus. Law § 390-f(4)
Plain Language
Operators may choose to allow covered persons (or their authorized agents) to continue generating realistic depictions of themselves even after an opt-out notice, provided the operator implements reasonable safeguards to ensure only the covered person or their authorized representatives can do so. If the safeguards are not reasonable — measured by the same industry-standard, cost-effectiveness, and up-to-date criteria as the blocking obligation — the operator is liable as if they failed to implement blocking at all. This is a permissive carve-out with a conditional liability hook: operators are not required to offer this self-use exception, but if they do, they must safeguard it adequately.
4. Nothing in this section shall prohibit the owner, licensee or operator of a covered system from implementing reasonable safeguards to permit the covered person, their agent, employee or representative to use such covered system to generate realistic depictions of such covered person, provided however that such owner, licensee or operator of such covered system shall be liable in the same manner as if they had violated subdivision two of this section where such safeguards are not reasonable. A safeguard is considered reasonable for purposes of this subdivision where the owner, licensee or operator of a covered system implements measures that are consistent with industry standards, not overly burdensome on the system, cost-effective to implement and maintain and are up to date.