Authors', artists', and performers' consent, credit, and compensation for training and simulation.
By year
By actor type
By jurisdiction
Newest first
“Equity is calling on the government to introduce a new system of automatic rights over your voice, face and body for all. These ‘personality rights’ would allow everyone to have control over their identity in the age of AI. They would provide a new layer of protection for performers against exploitation by AI models without your consent.”
Undated campaign page; docDate records access date (2026-07-21).
“The Secretary of State must now definitively rule out any new copyright exception, bringing an end to the uncertainty created by this prolonged process over the past year. This will send a clear message to AI developers that they must enter into licensing agreements with the UK’s media and creative copyright owners”
“We strongly reject any claim that the Code of Practice strikes a fair and workable balance or that the Template will deliver “sufficient” transparency about the majority of copyright works or other subject matter used to train GenAI models.”
Joint statement of 40 European and international creative and cultural sector organisations incl. CISAC, IFPI, European Writers' Council, STM.
“This bill helps to achieve that commonsense goal by creating an administrative subpoena process that allows copyright owners to obtain information from AI companies about the works used to train their models. As the Guild has long recognized, this kind of transparency is essential to giving authors the ability to enforce their rights.”
“Artists deserve to know when their works are used and determine the parameters – the Transparency & Responsibility for Artificial Intelligence Networks (TRAIN) Act empowers rightsholders with valuable insight into which specific inputs AI companies are copying to train their models. Just as importantly, it also ensures a clear path to the courts when authorization has not been given.”
“We, the undersigned organizations, call on you to strike the AI moratorium from the budget reconciliation text to protect our families. It is irresponsible and short sighted to strip children, creators, and Americans from all backgrounds of their most basic protections and tie the hands of state legislators.”
Co-led 140+ organization letter (with Common Sense Media, Young People's Alliance, ARI and others).
“Despite actively acknowledging that creative work is being stolen at scale, the Government chose once again to remove transparency provisions your Lordships provided, allowing the tech sector to continue to rob the creative industries blind.”
“SAG-AFTRA members and those who rely on their face and voice for their livelihood will be able to demand platforms remove illegal voice and image clones. Creatives will also be able to seek damages from those who intentionally cause harm.”
“this legislation that provides balanced and effective protections for all individuals against exploitative uses of their voice and likeness while supporting free speech, reducing litigation and achieving the promise of AI technology”
“The AI Action Plan should encourage the continued development of free market licensing to support a symbiotic relationship between content creators, publishers, and AI developers.”
“Specifically, the nation’s AI policy and AI Action Plan should respect intellectual property, support the development of voluntary licensing in free markets, and promote appropriate transparency and fair competition in the AI and technology sector.”
The filed RFI comments; doc-nma-actionplan-2025 is the accompanying press release.
“Big Tech needs to pay for the creative and research content they hoover up to train AI, just as they pay for their electricity and other normal costs of running a legally compliant business. We urgently need transparency regulations to lift the lid on AI usage”
Statement of CEO Dan Conway.
“The government’s consultation, along with its preferred policy option on AI and copyright, fails to address the real issue. The UK’s gold standard copyright law is already clear; what is missing is robust enforcement and transparency requirements that empower creative businesses to assert their rights.”
News Media Association (UK); statement of chief executive Owen Meredith. Coded support relative to the transparency ask; the quoted sentence criticises the government's preferred opt-out option.
“Retaining the UK’s gold standard copyright protections - and ensuring the law is enforceable and respected in the face of the challenges posed by GAI - will create incentives for GAI developers to enter into licence agreements with rights holders, ensuring a steady flow of quality, human-authored works for GAI training.”
“I'm here today to testify in support of the NO FAKES Act. Our members believe that AI technology, left unregulated, poses an existential threat to their ability to, one, require consent for the creative use of their digital representation.”
Speaker: Duncan Crabtree-Ireland, SAG-AFTRA National Executive Director. Third-party verbatim transcript.
“While Tennessee’s preexisting law protected name, image, and likeness, it did not specifically address new, personalized generative AI cloning models and services that enable human impersonation and allow users to make unauthorized fake works in the image and voice of others.”
“If this legislation is approved, those protections would now include a performer's voice and likeness, making Tennessee the first state in the nation to preserve individual voice, image and likeness against irresponsible and unethical AI in the form of deep fakes and audio cloning.”