Deepfakes, derecho de imagen y derecho de autor: desafíos jurídicos para artistas e intérpretes ante la inteligencia artificial generativa
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26422/RIPI.2026.espIA.lehPalabras clave:
deepfakes, clones digitales, inteligencia artificial generativa, derechos de autor, derecho de imagen, right of publicity, artistas e intérpretes, gobernanza algorítmica, legado digital post mortem, prueba de consentimientoResumen
El artículo examina los desafíos jurídicos que plantean los deepfakes y la clonación digital para artistas e intérpretes en el contexto de la inteligencia artificial generativa. Se demuestra que el régimen tradicional de derechos de autor y derechos de imagen resulta insuficiente para gobernar réplicas digitales que capturan la esencia performativa del intérprete. Se analizan cuatro familias tecnológicas —texto-a-video, clonación de voz, reanimación facial y transferencia de movimiento— y la fragmentación normativa que obliga a invocar simultáneamente múltiples líneas de protección, generando incertidumbre y asimetrías de poder.
Se desarrollan tres ejes: arquitectura contractual modular para licencias de clones digitales con remedios operativos, visibilidad algorítmica y desplazamiento de performers por contenido sintético y gobernanza del legado post mortem centrada en regular inputs antes que outputs. Se examinan desarrollos legislativos recientes (ELVIS Act, NY § 50-f, California § 3344, propuesta danesa) que convergen en reconocer la “réplica digital” como categoría autónoma y se analiza el “dividendo del mentiroso” en el plano probatorio. Se concluye que la identidad performativa migra hacia un esquema de propiedad intelectual especializada que requiere reconceptualización jurídica profunda, balanceando protección con libertad de expresión y derecho a la información.
Descargas
Referencias
Abbas, F. y Taeihagh, A. (2024). Unmasking deepfakes: A systematic review of deepfake detection and generation techniques using artificial intelligence. Expert Systems with Applications, 252, 124260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2024.124260 https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0957417424011266
Arık, S. Ö., Chen, J., Peng, K., Ping, W. y Zhou, Y. (2018). Neural voice cloning with a few samples. Proceedings of the 32nd Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS 2018). https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.06006
Azzuni, H. y El Saddik, A. (2025). Voice cloning: Comprehensive survey. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.00579
Bassan, S. (2025). Transparency ≠ accountability? Rethinking voluntary vs. mandatory content moderation reports. SSRN. https://ssrn.com/abstract=5143075
Bracha, O. (2024a). Generating derivatives: AI and copyright's most troublesome right. North Carolina Journal of Law & Technology, 25(3), 345-398. https://scholarship.law.unc.edu/ncjolt/vol25/iss3/2
Bracha, O. (2024b). The work of copyright in the age of machine production. Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, 38(1), 171-226. https://jolt.law.harvard.edu/assets/articlePDFs/v38/4-Bracha.pdf
California Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee. (2024). AB 2602, Kalra. Contracts against public policy: personal or professional services: digital replicas. California State Legislature. https://apcp.assembly.ca.gov/system/files/2024-04/ab-2602-kalra-apcp-analysis.pdf
Chandra, B., Dunietz, J. y Roberts, K. (2024). Reducing risks posed by synthetic content: An overview of technical approaches to digital content transparency (NIST AI 100-4). National Institute of Standards and Technology. https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.100-4
Chesney, R. y Citron, D. K. (2019). Deep fakes: A looming challenge for privacy, democracy, and national security. California Law Review, 107(6), 1753-1820. https://www.californialawreview.org/print/deep-fakes-a-looming-challenge-for-privacy-democracy-and-national-security
Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity. (2025). C2PA specifications (v2.3). https://c2pa.org/specifications/specifications/2.3/index.html
Cohen, G. (2023). Digital purgatory and the rights of the dead: Protecting against digital disinterment in the age of artificial intelligence. Cardozo Law Review De Novo, 121. SSRN. https://ssrn.com/abstract=4620092
CyberPeace Foundation. (22 de julio de 2025). Watermarking standards and policy for AI-generated media. https://cyberpeace.org/resources/blogs/watermarking-standards-and-policy-for-ai-generated-media
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP. (2025). Lights, camera, legislation: Are your entertainment contracts ready for the spotlight? Inside Tech Law. https://www.dwt.com/insights/2025/03/state-laws-regulating-ai-in-entertainment-industry
Delfino, R. A. (2023). Deepfakes on trial: A call to expand the trial judge's gatekeeping role to protect legal proceedings from technological fakery. UC Hastings Law Journal, 74(2), 313-381. https://repository.uclawsf.edu/hastings_law_journal/vol74/iss2/3/
Delfino, R. A. (2025). Deepfakes on trial 2.0: A revised proposal for a new federal rule of evidence to mitigate deepfake deceptions in court. Loyola Law School Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2025-10. https://ssrn.com/abstract=5188767
Denmark to tackle deepfakes by giving people copyright to their own features. (27 de junio de 2025). The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/jun/27/deepfakes-denmark-copyright-law-artificial-intelligence
Dixon, H. B., Jr. (2024). The “deepfake defense”: An evidentiary conundrum. Judges’ Journal, 63(2). https://www.americanbar.org/groups/judicial/resources/judges-journal/2024-spring/deepfake-defense-evidentiary-conundrum/
European Commission. (17 de diciembre de 2025). First draft: Code of Practice on transparency of AI-generated content. EU AI Office. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/code-practice-ai-generated-content
European Parliament & Council. (2024). Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 on artificial intelligence (AI Act), Article 50. Official Journal of the European Union, L 2024/1689. https://artificialintelligenceact.eu/article/50/
European Parliamentary Research Service. (2026). The Danish approach to copyright and deepfakes: A model for the EU? https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EPRS_ATA%282026%29782611
Gervais, D. (2015). The protection of performers under U.S. law in comparative perspective. IP Theory, 5(1), Article 8. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2700919
Gozalbez, R. J. y Lehtinen, L. M. (2025). Revolución digital y propiedad intelectual: El desafío del derecho de autor en la era de la puesta a disposición. Tirant lo Blanch
Haneman, V. J. (2024). The law of digital resurrection. B.C. L. Rev. __ (forthcoming 2025). https://ssrn.com/abstract=4899324
HeyGen. (s.f.-a). AI and ethics: Responsible AI video creation. https://www.heygen.com/ethics
HeyGen. (s.f.-b). HeyGen Biometric information privacy notice. https://www.heygen.com/biometric-privacy-notice
Horten, M. (2022). Algorithms patrolling content: Where’s the harm? SSRN. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3792097
Jayanti, A. (2020). Deepfakes. Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School. https://www.belfercenter.org/sites/default/files/2024-09/Deepfakes-2.pdf
Jones Walker LLP. (2026). Deepfakes-as-a-service meets state laws: Governing synthetic media in a fragmented legal landscape. National Law Review. https://natlawreview.com/article/deepfakes-service-meets-state-laws-governing-synthetic-media-fragmented-legal
Kansy, M., Naruniec, J., Schroers, C., Gross, M. y Weber, R. M. (2025). Reenact anything: Semantic video motion transfer using motion-textual inversion. ACM SIGGRAPH 2025 Conference Papers. https://doi.org/10.1145/3721238.3730668
Kapilian, A. (2025). New York’s Digital Replicas Law: An evaluation of new protections for performing artists. Cornell Journal of Law & Public Policy. https://publications.lawschool.cornell.edu/jlpp/2025/02/11/the-digital-replica-contracts-act-an-evaluation-of-new-yorks-new-protections-for-performing-artists
Keswani, V. y Celis, L. E. (2024). Algorithmic fairness from the perspective of legal anti-discrimination principles. SSRN. https://ssrn.com/abstract=4116835
Kligvasser, I., Cohen, R., Leifman, G., Rivlin, E. y Elad, M. (2025). Anchored diffusion for video face reenactment. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV 2025). https://doi.org/10.1109/WACV61041.2025.00402
Kohel, M. D. y Klukosky, F. M. P. (2024). The ELVIS Act: Tennessee law addresses AI's impact on the music industry. Maryland State Bar Association. https://www.msba.org/site/site/content/News-and-Publications/News/General-News/ELVIS-Act.aspx
Latham & Watkins. (2024). The ELVIS Act: Tennessee shakes up its right of publicity law and takes on generative AI. https://www.lw.com/admin/upload/SiteAttachments/The-ELVIS-Act-Tennessee-Shakes-Up-Its-Right-of-Publicity-Law-and-Takes-On-Generative-AI.pdf
Licensing Executives Society International. (2025). From performance to replica: Navigating consent, ownership and licensing in the age of generative AI. https://lesi.org/article-of-the-month/from-performance-to-replica-navigating-consent-ownership-and-licensing-in-the-age-of-generative-ai/
McCann, M. (2025). Jack Nicklaus wins licensing case as judge says he can use own NIL. Sportico. https://www.sportico.com/law/analysis/2025/jack-nicklaus-wins-nil-case-1234844880/
Morrison Foerster. (2025). Digital avatars deep dive series: Navigating the legal and regulatory landscape in 2025. https://www.mofo.com/resources/insights/250922-digital-avatars-deep-dive-series-navigating
Mustak, M. (2023). Deepfakes: Deceptions, mitigations, and opportunities. Journal of Business Research, 154, 113368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113368
Nachbar, T. B. (2021). Algorithmic fairness, algorithmic discrimination. Florida State University Law Review, 48, 509-558. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3530053
OpenAI. (30 de septiembre de 2025). Launching Sora responsibly. https://openai.com/index/launching-sora-responsibly/
P’ng, J. (2024). The resurrection will not be televised: Legal remedies for posthumous deepfakes. Georgetown Law Technology Review, 8(2), 338-370. https://ssrn.com/abstract=4900895
Preminger, A. y Kugler, M. B. (2024). The right of publicity can save actors from deepfake armageddon. Berkeley Technology Law Journal (forthcoming). SSRN. https://ssrn.com/abstract=4563774
Rijsbosch, B., Van Dijck, G. y Kollnig, K. (2025). Adoption of watermarking for generative AI systems in practice and implications under the new EU AI Act. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.18156
Rosati, E. (2025). Infringing AI: Liability for AI-generated outputs under international, EU, and UK copyright law. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 16(2), 603-627. https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2024.72
Rothman, J. E. (2025). Revised No FAKES Act still poses danger of our losing control of our digital selves. Rothman’s Roadmap to the Right of Publicity. https://rightofpublicityroadmap.com/news_commentary/revised-no-fakes-act-still-poses-danger-of-our-losing-control-of-our-digital-selves/
SAG-AFTRA. (2023). Artificial intelligence resources. https://www.sagaftra.org/contracts-industry-resources/contracts/2023-tvtheatrical-contracts/artificial-intelligence-resources
Samuelson, P. (2025). Assessing the feasibility of collective licensing of in-copyright works as training data for generative AI systems. SSRN. https://ssrn.com/abstract=6051014
Schjødt. (2025). Owning the self: Denmark's copyright turn against deepfakes. https://schjodt.com/news/owning-the-self-denmarks-copyright-turn-against-deepfakes
State of Tennessee, 113th General Assembly. (2024). HB 2091 / Public Chapter 588 (Ensuring Likeness, Voice, and Image Security Act of 2024 — “ELVIS Act”). https://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/Billinfo/default.aspx?BillNumber=HB2091&ga=113
Szkalej, K. (2025). Music recommender systems and the copyright blind spot: Conceptualising the right to be heard. SSRN. https://ssrn.com/abstract=5967014
Tech Policy Press. (2025). Denmark leads EU push to copyright faces in fight against deepfakes. https://www.techpolicy.press/denmark-leads-eu-push-to-copyright-faces-in-fight-against-deepfakes/
U.S. Copyright Office. (2024). Copyright and artificial intelligence: Part 1—Digital replicas (Report of the Register of Copyrights). https://www.copyright.gov/ai/Copyright-and-Artificial-Intelligence-Part-1-Digital-Replicas-Report.pdf
U.S. Department of Defense, Cybersecurity Information Sheet. (2025). Content credentials: Enhancing trust and transparency in digital content. https://media.defense.gov/2025/Jan/29/2003634788/-1/-1/0/CSI-CONTENT-CREDENTIALS.PDF
University of Colorado Boulder. (17 de noviembre de 2025). Deepfakes and AI in the courtroom: Report calls for legal reforms to address a troubling trend. CU Boulder Today. https://www.colorado.edu/today/2025/11/17/deepfakes-and-ai-courtroom-report-calls-legal-reforms-address-troubling-trend
Von Lewinski, S. (2013). The Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual Performances. Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property and Competition Law Research Paper No. 13-08. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2239109
Wachter, S., Mittelstadt, B. y Russell, C. (2020). Why fairness cannot be automated: Bridging the gap between EU non-discrimination law and AI. Computer Law & Security Review, 41(2021), 105567. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3547922
World Intellectual Property Organization. (s.f.). Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual Performances: Summary. https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/wipo_pub_228-accessible1.pdf
World Intellectual Property Organization. (1961). International Convention for the Protection of Performers, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting Organisations (Rome Convention). WIPO Lex. https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text/289757
World Intellectual Property Organization. (1996). WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT). WIPO Lex. https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text/295578
World Intellectual Property Organization. (2012). Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual Performances. WIPO Lex. https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text/295837
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2026 Lucas Lehtinen
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0.
Esta licencia permite copiar, distribuir, exhibir y representar la obra siempre y cuando se reconozca la autoría y se cite la obra de la forma adecuada. No se permite el uso comercial de la obra original ni la generación de obras derivadas.
Los autores garantizan a la Revista Iberoamericana de la Propiedad Intelectual el derecho de ser la primera publicación del trabajo.
