No one wants to be in a bad movie—but imagine a movie studio casting you in new movies after you die, without your consent. That may have once seemed something out of a Black Mirror episode, but it’s becoming a real issue, and many think current legal protections don’t go nearly far enough.
In 2024, the late Ian Holm appeared, in digital form, in Alien: Romulus four years after his death, a move some critics decried as “digital necromancy.” Early this year, producers partnered with a British artificial intelligence startup to re-create the voice of Alain Dorval, who spent decades dubbing Sylvester Stallone classics like Rocky and Rambo in French. The plan was scrapped after his daughter called the re-created voice, set to appear in 2025’s Armor, “unacceptable.”
Of late, unconfirmed reports have surfaced of studio plans for the recently deceased Diane Keaton to be digitally resurrected for a sequel to 2005’s The Family Stone. “Her family is fuming,” said one source.
As concerning as it is for the estates of deceased actors, the potential for AI resurrection and manipulation is a real concern for working actors due to the rise in contracts that include rights “in perpetuity” to an actor’s likeness.
Signing your likeness away
After the 2023 SAG actors’ strike, actors in the US gained some legal protections against post-death AI resurrection—in fact, it’s thought to be one of the key reasons the dispute dragged on for so long. But many countries outside the US, including the UK, do not yet have comparable legal protections via their acting guilds or image rights. Even if legal protections do exist, that doesn’t stop actors from potentially signing away the rights to their image via what’s known as an “in-perpetuity contract.” These types of contracts, if they hold up in court, can grant forever rights to exploit digital images a company has captured of an actor.
Victoria Haneman, a professor at the University of Georgia School of Law, says that “in-perpetuity” contracts began appearing in big-budget Hollywood contracts en masse all the way back in 2021. But with the technology improving so rapidly, the issue of consent becomes an increasingly thorny one. She points to how rapper Kanye West is thought to have spent over $1 million in 2020 on a hologram of Robert Kardashian, the deceased father of ex-wife Kim Kardashian; by the standards of modern AI deepfakes, it looks robotic and practically amateurish.
“You do not even know what you do not know with regard to how your image can be used later,” Haneman says. “A lot of actors have signed very broad contracts without really contemplating this possibility. They sign contracts with perpetuity clauses in them, not really understanding how that image can be used later.”
Of course, it’s impossible to tell what dead actors might make of AI re-creations of themselves. But many living actors have had less-than-stellar experiences of seeing themselves re-created on screen.
Scott Jacqmein, a Texas-based actor, was paid just $750 in 2024 for the rights to his likeness to be used in AI-generated ads on TikTok, according to a contract reviewed by Fast Company. Over the next year, Scott found his own AI likeness was being used to advertise witches for hire, as well as to promote home insurance in Spanish (he doesn’t speak Spanish). Scott, whose story was first covered by The New York Times, later found his likeness being used on YouTube to promote “male enhancement” products, a violation of the contract he signed.
Scott moved into professional acting later in life after a decade-long career in nursing. He didn’t have an agent and understood little about the business of the industry. But his issue is not just that his likeness was used in ways that he would not otherwise consent to, but that AI-generated representations simply don’t do good actors justice.
“Looking at the reels that TikTok did, they absolutely missed my spark, my essence, and what I have to bring to any role that is offered to me,” he says. “Even though I’m playing a raging Hulk, I’m going to bring my nuances, my personality, my traits that aren’t necessarily able to be picked up by AI and replicated by AI.”
Legal patchwork
Many of the issues with actors finding their AI likenesses repurposed beyond what they expected come down to the lack of what are known as “image rights”—which are different from the protections given to creators by copyright—and can differ by country or state.
“In the UK, we don’t really have a concept of a right to your face,” says Lillian Edwards, a professor of technology law at Newcastle Law School. “Partly because it would have a really bad impact on freedom of expression. It might stop you taking pictures of groups of people, for example, or putting celebrities into memes.”
If an independent movie director were to create an AI Sean Connery, the use of his likeness would be theoretically legally sound, as there is no postmortem image or “personality” right in the UK. Currently, though, she says most companies seek the permission of relatives because of the risk of negative publicity, at least at present.
“The point is that copyright law is not designed to protect your image but the works you create,” Edwards says. “It’s meant to incentivize you to create more useful works—whereas your face is something you’re just born with.”
Some countries have passed legislation to prevent AI resurrection done without permission of heirs or a will. Some US states protect image and reputation after death up to a point. Denmark passed legislation earlier this year establishing posthumous rights to one’s image, including body and face, for up to 50 years after death.
Joe Ashman, a British actor who has been in Netflix series like Free Rein and The Man Who Fell to Earth, when asked about in-perpetuity contracts, thinks that when he first started out in professional acting at the age of 18, “he would have signed anything just to get a job.”
Now, Joe has overwhelming confidence in his agent and management team to handle any negotiations on his behalf, but many forms of AI re-creation would make him extremely uncomfortable, including serious body modification. This means no slimming down, no adding muscle, or even changing hair color. Though he insists that any resurrection would need to be done under the right circumstances, he doesn’t deny financials would be part of his attitude on the topic—providing for your family after death isn’t a bad prospect.
“I love the idea that if things did happen and somebody wants to pay a lot of money to digitally re-enhance me, I could pay for my nephews to go to college.”
What can actors do now?
Legal experts have differing views on mitigating potential risks this poses to actors. University of Georgia’s Haneman feels that ultimately centralized legislation or action from unions is what is needed—unestablished actors simply don’t have the power to hold their ground against powerful movie studios.
The UK Artificial Intelligence Bill is a proposed piece of legislation set to pass sometime in 2026, which will write AI regulation principles into law and establish standards for AI developers and users. But at present it only focuses on the work creatives produce—not their images themselves.
In particular, Haneman thinks that “in-perpetuity contracts” in their current state definitely do not address any future risks posed by AI to actors.
“If I have the ability” to own an actor’s image in perpetuity, she says, “I’m going to do that.”
Awareness of these issues does now seem to be slowly building within the industry, and more established actors are speaking out. Homer Simpson’s voice actor Hank Azaria recently called the idea of AI replacing him and his fellow Simpsons voice actors “just plain wrong.” Meanwhile, Samuel L. Jackson has weighed in on “in perpetuity” and “known and unknown” clauses in contracts, telling young actors to simply cross them out. (Jacqmein’s advice on signing in-perpetuity contracts is similar: “Just don’t”).
The issue may be that law simply always advances slower than technology. Existing laws protecting actors and celebrities evolved over hundreds of years—not 20. The film and TV world is now truly in uncharted territory when it comes to AI resurrection, and it’s unknown if the lawmakers and industry can react quickly enough.