Deepfakes, direito de imagem e direito autoral: desafios jurídicos para artistas e intérpretes diante da inteligência artificial generativa
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26422/RIPI.2026.espIA.lehPalavras-chave:
deepfakes, clones digitais, inteligência artificial generativa, direitos autorais, direito de imagem, right of publicity, artistas e intérpretes, governança algorítmica, legado digital post-mortem, prova de consentimentoResumo
O artigo examina os desafios jurídicos colocados pelos deepfakes e a clonagem digital para artistas e intérpretes no contexto da IA generativa. Demonstra-se que o regime tradicional de direitos autorais e de imagem é insuficiente para governar réplicas digitais que capturam a essência performativa do intérprete. Abordam-se quatro famílias tecnológicas —texto-para-vídeo, clonagem de voz, reanimação facial e transferência de movimento— e a fragmentação normativa que obriga a invocar simultaneamente múltiplas linhas de proteção, gerando incerteza e assimetrias de poder.
Desenvolvem-se três eixos: arquitetura contratual modular para licenças de clones digitais com remédios operacionais; visibilidade algorítmica e deslocamento de performers por conteúdo sintético; e governança do legado post-mortem centrada em regular inputs antes que outputs. Examinam-se desenvolvimentos legislativos recentes (ELVIS Act, NY § 50-f, California § 3344, proposta dinamarquesa) que convergem no reconhecimento da “réplica digital” como categoria autônoma, e analisa-se o “dividendo do mentiroso” no plano probatório. Conclui-se que a identidade performativa migra para um esquema de propriedade intelectual especializada que exige reconceituãção jurídica profunda, equilibrando proteção com liberdade de expressão e direito à informação.
Downloads
Referências
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
Downloads
Publicado
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2026 Lucas Lehtinen
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
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.
