Canonical text (the exact bytes fingerprinted)

TRUVACE RECORD VERSION
record: TRV-2026-0175
version: 1
kind: certified
reason: Certified into the record
timestamp: 2026-07-13T09:12:36.373425Z
status: published
lens: p_space
sector: entertainment
headline: Do deepfakes, digital replicas and human digital twins justify personality rights?
dek: Abstract Unauthorised deepfakes are deeply problematic, from the spreading of misinformation to non‐consensual pornographic content. This paper asks whether deepfakes, digital replicas and human digital twins justify personality rights. To address this question, it examines the harms that deepfakes can cause through disinformation, demeaning content and displacing creative workers. It demonstrates that the current UK legal patchwork of passing off, intellectual property, defamation, and criminal laws do not adeq…
gain_title: (none)
problem_title: Unauthorised deepfakes cause disinformation, demeaning non-consensual pornographic content, and displacement of creative workers, which the current UK legal patchwork does not adequately address.
trace_subject: (none)
gain_reading: (none)
gain_evidence: (none)
problem_reading: Unauthorised deepfakes cause disinformation, demeaning non-consensual pornographic content, and displacement of creative workers, which the current UK legal patchwork does not adequately address.
problem_evidence: harms that deepfakes can cause through disinformation, demeaning content and displacing creative workers | current UK legal patchwork of passing off, intellectual property, defamation, and criminal laws do not adequately address these harms
quick_read: A March 2026 peer-reviewed paper in The Journal of World Intellectual Property asks whether deepfakes, digital replicas and human digital twins justify personality rights in the UK. It catalogues harms from unauthorised deepfakes, including spreading misinformation, non-consensual pornographic content, and displacing creative workers, and argues the existing patchwork of passing off, IP, defamation and criminal law is inadequate.

The significance lies in framing personality rights as a dedicated remedy for AI-enabled likeness misuse, moving beyond incidental IP or defamation claims. What remains uncertain is how such a right would be scoped in practice, how the proposed freedom-of-expression exceptions would operate, and whether a UK-only 70-year post-mortem right would deter cross-border deepfake creation and distribution.
limitation: Proposal is limited to UK law, proposes a right lasting 70 years after death, and acknowledges need for exceptions to protect freedom of expression, indicating unresolved balancing and jurisdictional scope.
tag: Evidence-backed problem
key_points: Paper examines harms from unauthorised deepfakes including disinformation, demeaning content, and displacement of creative workers. | Abstract states current UK patchwork of passing off, intellectual property, defamation and criminal laws does not adequately address these harms. | Proposes automatic unwaivable personality right lasting 70 years after death with exceptions to protect freedom of expression. | Frames deepfakes as hinges to open door for personality rights in the UK.
rundown: The paper, published 18 March 2026, surveys unauthorised deepfakes and related digital replicas, identifying three harm pathways: disinformation, demeaning content including non-consensual pornography, and economic displacement of creative workers.

It evaluates existing UK remedies d passing off, intellectual property, defamation and criminal laws d and finds them insufficient, then argues for a new automatic unwaivable personality right lasting 70 years post-mortem with freedom-of-expression exceptions.
sources:
- peer_reviewed | The Journal of World Intellectual Property | https://doi.org/10.1111/jwip.70020 | 2026-03-18
prev: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

sha256

dcf4cf85a3ec9664ad23fce0018f3a53d48f787e2803d03e5ea1e77bc55eddce

previous

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000