California generally requires specific, informed consent, negotiated with an attorney or union representative present, before a production can use an AI-generated digital replica of a performer's voice or likeness under AB 2602. Broad, boilerplate release language usually isn't enough on its own, and this applies to crew and background performers as well as principal cast.
In This Article
AI tools that can recreate a real person's face, voice, or performance have moved from novelty to production reality faster than most standard contracts anticipated. That gap has left performers and crew unsure what they actually agreed to when they signed a general appearance release before this technology became commonplace on set. As AI-generated performances get more technically convincing, the gap between what workers signed and what's actually being done with their likeness keeps growing.
Your Likeness Rights Under California Law
California recognizes a that gives every person control over the commercial use of their own name, voice, image, and likeness. That right doesn't disappear when a job ends unless it was specifically and clearly assigned for that purpose. A generic release signed for one project doesn't automatically cover uses no one discussed at the time, and this applies to background performers as much as it does to lead actors.
This protection also generally extends into voiceover and motion capture work, where a distinctive voice or movement could plausibly be captured and later used to train or generate an AI model, even without a traditional on-camera appearance. The underlying principle stays the same: control over your own image and voice belongs to you by default.
A background performer's face from a 2022 shoot turns up in a 2026 AI-generated trailer for an unrelated project. The original release never mentioned AI use, which is exactly the gap AB 2602 was designed to close.
AB 2602: California's Digital Replica Law
California passed AB 2602, effective in 2025, specifically to address AI-generated performances. It generally requires that any provision authorizing an AI digital replica include a reasonably specific description of the intended use, and that the performer be represented by legal counsel or a union rep when agreeing to it. The law was a direct response to concerns raised during recent industry-wide labor actions, where AI replica use was a central sticking point.
A vague clause buried in a standard deal memo, agreed to without legal or union representation, is exactly the kind of provision AB 2602 was written to prevent from being enforceable.
Notably, these requirements apply regardless of union status, which matters because a large share of entertainment work in California happens outside a union contract entirely.
What Ordinary Contracts Usually Say About This
Many standard releases were written before AI replica technology was a realistic concern, and often contain broad language granting rights to a person's "image and likeness in any media now known or hereafter devised." Under AB 2602, that catch-all language is unlikely to satisfy the specific-description requirement for an AI digital replica, even if it was meant to cover future formats generally.
This creates a real gap for anyone told that old boilerplate already covers AI use. Language drafted to anticipate future distribution formats isn't the same as language specifically describing an AI-generated version of a person's voice or face. Productions negotiating new contracts sometimes bury generic-sounding AI provisions deep in a long agreement, designed to look sufficiently specific without actually spelling out how the replica will be used or for how long.
Union Protections for AI Use
SAG-AFTRA's current contracts include their own consent and compensation requirements before AI can replicate a performer's voice or likeness, separate from and in addition to AB 2602. For union members, an AI use provision generally has to satisfy both frameworks at once, and these protections typically require ongoing compensation rather than a single flat buyout.
Background performers and other non-principal union members are specifically covered by many of these newer provisions too, reflecting that AI can replicate a crowd of background performers just as easily as it can replicate a lead. That structure recognizes an AI replica can be reused indefinitely across future projects in ways a single original performance never could be.
When a Signed Release Still Isn't Enough
Even a specific-sounding clause can fall short if it wasn't genuinely negotiated, if the performer wasn't represented at the time, or if the actual AI use goes meaningfully beyond what the release described. A release authorizing use "in this film" doesn't obviously extend to training a separate AI model or generating performances never actually filmed.
A release signed under time pressure, handed over as one of dozens of pages on the first day of a shoot with no real chance to read it, also raises separate concerns about whether consent was genuinely informed, independent of whether the wording itself was specific enough. A clause permitting AI use "for marketing related to this project" is a very different scope of consent than one permitting broader use across unrelated future projects.
What to Do If Your Likeness Was Used Without Permission
Save the original contract, any correspondence about AI use specifically, and evidence of how your image, voice, or performance was actually used. Compare the described use against what the production actually did. Given how new and unsettled this area of law still is, that gap is worth having reviewed sooner rather than later.
If you're a union member, it's also worth reaching out to your union representative directly, since they may already be aware of a pattern involving the same production. Screenshots or clips of the actual AI-generated content are worth preserving as soon as you become aware of it, since it can be altered or removed once a dispute arises.
This article is for general educational purposes and is not legal, tax, or financial advice for your specific situation, and may not reflect the most current law. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship with the Law Offices of Corey A. Pingle. If you're dealing with a real workplace issue, contact our office or start a free case review to get guidance based on your actual facts.