What This Bill Does
The NO FAKES Act of 2026 would give individuals and certain right holders a federal property right to control the use of a person’s voice or visual likeness in a “digital replica.” It also reaches online services that host or distribute user-uploaded material, search services, app stores, cloud storage, and related platforms if they are used to make unauthorized replica content available. The bill sets detailed rules for written licenses, limits licenses for minors, and creates post-mortem rights that can last at least 10 years after death and potentially longer if renewed. It also directs the Register of Copyrights to maintain a public directory of registered post-mortem digital replication rights and may allow a reasonable filing fee.
- Creates a federal right to authorize use of a person’s voice or visual likeness in a digital replica.
- Defines a digital replica as a highly realistic computer-generated likeness; excludes authorized sampling, remixing, mastering, and remastering.
- Limits living-person licenses to 10 years, and to 5 years for minors, with court approval required for minors.
- Lets post-mortem rights last 10 years after death, with 5-year renewals if there is active authorized public use.
- Directs the Register of Copyrights to keep a public directory of registered post-mortem digital replication rights.
Who This Bill Affects
If you are a creator, performer, or the family of a deceased public figure, this bill could give you stronger control over unauthorized AI-generated uses of a voice or face, including the ability to license those rights and, in some cases, renew post-mortem protection. If you use platforms that host user-uploaded video, audio, or images, the bill could also lead to more takedowns, more verification, and more licensing requirements when content is alleged to be a digital replica. For a typical person who is not a public-facing creator, the direct effect is usually limited, but it could still matter if your image or voice is copied online without permission.
See how this bill affects you — sign in for a personalized analysisWho Supports & Opposes This
- performers and recording artists They may argue the bill gives them meaningful control over AI-generated imitations of their voices and faces, which can protect reputation, bargaining power, and income. The written-license rules and post-mortem protections also help families and estates manage a deceased performer’s likeness as a property right.
- families and estates of deceased public figures They are likely to support the bill because it allows inherited and transferable rights after death and creates a public directory for registered post-mortem rights. That can make it easier to police unauthorized commercial use and to license lawful uses.
- platform users worried about impersonation Users harmed by deceptive deepfakes may support the bill because it gives right holders a clearer legal basis to challenge unauthorized replica content. That may reduce fraud, nonconsensual sexualized content, and misleading political or commercial impersonation.
- online platforms and digital service providers They may argue the bill’s coverage of websites, apps, search engines, cloud storage, app stores, and other interactive computer services creates costly monitoring and compliance burdens. Smaller services may worry about over-removal and legal risk when users upload parody, commentary, or other borderline content.
- independent creators and remix artists They may contend the definition of digital replica and the liability framework could chill legitimate creative uses, especially where AI tools are used for transformative or experimental works. Even with exemptions for authorized sampling and remixing, the bill could encourage licensing friction and takedown disputes.
- civil liberties and free-expression advocates They are likely to worry that a broad likeness-right regime may be used to suppress criticism, satire, or documentary uses by creating new rights and enforcement pathways. Post-mortem control and renewal mechanisms may also expand private control over historically significant voices and images.
Key Implications
-
““each individual or right holder shall have the right to authorize the use””
This creates a permission-based regime for digital replicas. In practice, anyone wanting to commercially exploit a realistic AI version of a person’s voice or face would need authorization from the person or the current right holder.
-
““not assignable during the life of the individual””
A living person keeps personal control over the right and generally cannot sell it outright while alive. The bill instead allows licensing, which limits permanent transfers during life.
-
““a license… while the individual is living… does not exceed 10 years””
Long-term living-person deals are capped. This reduces the chance of very long contracts locking up someone’s likeness for decades, but it also means companies must renegotiate licenses more often.
-
““for a period of 10 years after the death of the individual””
The bill extends protection beyond death, so heirs or other right holders can control and monetize use of a deceased person’s likeness for at least a decade.
-
““maintain a current directory of post-mortem digital replication rights””
The Copyright Office would become a public reference point for who controls these rights after death. That could make clearance easier for lawful users, but it also formalizes a new federal registration system.
Latest Status
June 18, 2026
Committee on the Judiciary. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Related Bills
Take Action
Get more from BillBoard
Free tools to understand, respond to, and track this bill.
Ask AI about this billData sourced from api.congress.gov.