Denmark Just Copyrighted Your Face. The U.S. Still Thinks That’s a Vibe.
Denmark didn’t just propose a law. They fired a warning shot at every AI startup, platform, and policymaker pretending deepfakes are just a content moderation issue.
They’re proposing something wild: giving every citizen copyright-style rights over their own face, voice, and body. Not just celebrities. Not influencers. Everyone.
If someone deepfakes you? That’s a copyright violation. Takedown, damages, platform fines. You don’t have to prove harm. You don’t have to be famous. You just have to exist.
And that sound you hear is every American IP lawyer quietly panicking because this actually makes sense.
⸻
Let’s talk about why this matters for U.S. law—and why the whole “right of publicity” system here looks like it was built in a pre-AI cave.
The U.S. Framework Is a Legal Collage with Duct Tape
We’ve got:
The DEFIANCE Act (federal, pending) for deepfake porn.
Tennessee’s ELVIS Act, which covers AI voice cloning… if you’re a commercial performer.
California’s platform takedown obligations for fake political and explicit content.
Section 230, which immunizes platforms for most of this anyway.
The possibility to copyright yourself as a character (difficultly level: extreme).
What we don’t have:
A unified, affirmative right to control your own digital likeness.
A way for regular people to enforce it.
A legal doctrine that treats synthetic identity as anything other than “¯\(ツ)/¯”.
⸻
Denmark’s Not Just Regulating Deepfakes. They’re Inventing the Next Copyright
Here’s the move:
You don’t need to prove harm.
You don’t need to be monetizing your likeness.
You don’t need to get famous first.
You just say: that’s my face. That’s my voice. Take it down.
It’s the digital equivalent of owning your own image file. And it works.
Even better? Platforms have to comply or get fined. Not a slap-on-the-wrist “friendly reminder”. Actual, revenue-shaking, EU-style fines.
This is GDPR for your face. And if the EU adopts it (spoiler: they will), it becomes international reality.
⸻
“But Copyright Is Territorial!”
Sure. Until a European sues your U.S. company in Denmark. Or files under the Berne Convention. Or triggers the DSA. Or until the EU Commission decides to make an example out of a Silicon Valley platform hosting unlicensed human faces.
If you’re building AI tools that output people—and your compliance stack ends at “don’t be evil”—you’re legally naked in Europe. And if this becomes a norm, that risk becomes borderless.
⸻
The Real U.S. Question: Can We Treat Likeness Like IP Before a Judge Makes Us?
The U.S. already lets you:
Copyright a character.
Trademark a name.
Protect a jingle.
But your face? Your voice? Your entire body of biometric identifiers?
Only protected if you die in the right state or get famous fast.
Denmark’s flipping that: you own it from birth. And it’s enforceable like copyright. Not a privacy right. Not a vibes-based tort. Actual IP.
And that matters, because the moment this hits scale, U.S. courts are going to get asked the big question:
If a model outputs you without consent—is that infringement, impersonation, or just innovation?
Denmark just answered. Your move, America.
⸻
Final thought:
If you’re building AI tools that touch anything resembling a human, and you don’t have a likeness licensing framework, you’re already behind.
This is the new IP frontier. Don’t wait for Congress to name it.
⸻
🤖 Subscribe to AnaGPT
3x a week [MWF], I break down the latest legal in AI, tech, and law—minus the jargon. Whether you’re a founder, creator, or lawyer, my newsletter will help you stay two steps ahead of the competition.
➡️ Forward this post to someone working in/on AI. They’ll thank you later.
➡️ Follow Ana on Instagram @anajuneja
➡️ Add Ana on LinkedIn @anajuneja