As probably the most well-liked celebrities on the earth, Taylor Swift has already persisted her percentage of AI-related abuse.
Pretend nudes of the singer have unfold broadly on-line. Her voice and likeness have additionally been used to create fabricated political messages and bogus product endorsements.
In April 2026, Swift driven again. Her highbrow belongings and emblem control corporate, TAS Rights Control, filed trademark programs overlaying quick audio clips of her voice and her visible likeness.
As a legislation professor, I used to be struck through Swift’s filings as a result of they spotlight a brand new felony frontier in synthetic intelligence.
Copyright is ready ingenious works
For instance, The New York Occasions sued OpenAI and Microsoft in 2023, alleging that the firms used the opening’s journalism to coach their AI techniques, which then went directly to generate outputs that experience competed with or reproduced New York Occasions articles. Authors, publishers, photograph businesses and song publishers have sued different AI firms for a similar reason why.
Emblems are about believe
Trademark legislation begins from a distinct fear. It protects names, photographs, sounds and different markers that lend a hand shoppers determine who or what’s at the back of a services or products.
A hallmark is usually a phrase, word, image, design or mixture of these items. Acquainted examples come with emblem names similar to Coca-Cola, trademarks just like the Nike swoosh, slogans like Subway’s “Eat Fresh” or even unique sounds, such because the MGM lion roar.
FIFA makes use of a ‘TM’ wordmark in its 2026 International Cup emblem, that means football’s global governing frame is claiming the emblem as a hallmark. Coca-Cola includes a small ‘R’ with a circle round it on the finish of its iconic cursive emblem to signify that it has registered the design as a hallmark with the US Patent and Trademark Place of job.
Steve Russell/Toronto Big name by the use of Getty Photographs
A hallmark isn’t a basic possession proper over a phrase, word, voice or symbol. This can be a means of serving to shoppers know who stands at the back of what they’re purchasing, listening to or seeing.
That distinction turns into an important as soon as AI can mimic an individual’s voice or face. Assume an organization makes use of an AI-generated Swift-like voice to promote fragrance or cryptocurrency. The worry is that listeners might assume Swift authorized of the product or message.
That may be a trademark downside. Trademark legislation asks whether or not the use misleads shoppers about whether or not an organization or individual has produced or counseled one thing. Swift’s filings seem aimed toward that risk. They counsel a priority past copied songs: faux endorsements, faux appearances and pretend alerts of approval.
Swift’s considerations additionally bleed into what are referred to as “publicity rights,” which in most cases give protection to in opposition to unauthorized business use of an individual’s identification, similar to a reputation, symbol, likeness or voice.
A vintage exposure rights case comes to an organization the usage of a celeb’s face in an commercial with out permission to lie to shoppers into believing the fame endorses the product.
AI’s talent to clone voices and photographs makes exposure legislation particularly related. However in the US, exposure rights are most commonly ruled through state legislation, and the foundations range broadly from one state to every other. That patchwork helped encourage the bipartisan NO FAKES Act, presented in 2025, which might create a countrywide usual that will restrict unauthorized AI-generated replicas of an individual’s voice or visible likeness. The invoice, nonetheless in its early levels, has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee for attention.
The untested phase
Swift isn’t by myself: Actor Matthew McConaughey trademarked “alright alright alright,” his memorable line from “Dazed and Confused,” to give protection to it from being utilized in AI-generated content material.
The courts have already affirmed that sounds can serve as as emblems. But it surely isn’t transparent whether or not trademark legislation can police AI-generated replicas of an individual’s voice or symbol when the problem isn’t counterfeiting however a manufactured endorsement.
An individual’s voice or likeness isn’t routinely a hallmark. With the intention to qualify as one, it should be used lend a hand shoppers determine who’s at the back of a services or products.
That stated, Swift’s filings replicate an actual downside: AI has allowed faux endorsements to appear and sound actual sufficient to unfold sooner than somebody has time to set the document instantly.
