The digital age, with its rapid advancements in artificial intelligence, has ushered in a new era where the fabricated can appear strikingly real. We’re talking about sophisticated AI-generated content, specifically “deepfakes,” that can depict individuals in scenarios that never occurred. While a recent law in the UK, the Data (Use and Access) Act, has taken a significant step by criminalizing the creation, sharing, or requesting of sexually explicit deepfakes, the broader implications of these technologies on reputation, intellectual property, and even the very fabric of truth, remain complex and largely unaddressed. Legal expert Cowan highlights the inherent difficulty for individuals to seek recourse, especially when such content is presented in a “non-contentious manner.” Unless tangible commercial or reputational damage can be definitively proven, an individual’s options for legal action are severely limited. This creates a disquieting vacuum where misrepresentation can proliferate without immediate legal consequence, leaving individuals vulnerable to potentially damaging, albeit fabricated, narratives.
Consider the hypothetical, yet increasingly plausible, scenario of an AI-generated video showing a well-known footballer, like Celtic’s Luke McCowan, engaging in an act of aggression, such as punching an assistant referee. While such an obvious fabrication might not damage his reputation among discerning fans, the sheer existence of such content, and its potential to spread, raises serious questions. This is where the concept of “passing off” becomes a more pressing concern, not just for individuals, but for brands and entities as well. Passing off refers to the deceptive practice where someone unfairly associates their own products or services with the established reputation and goodwill of another – be it a business, a brand, or even a prominent public figure like a footballer. The intent behind such an act is to mislead consumers into believing there’s a legitimate connection, ultimately to the detriment of the established entity. This poses a significant threat in the AI age, as deepfakes could be used to create convincing but false endorsements or associations, blurring the lines of authenticity and trust.
The legal landscape, however, is slowly beginning to acknowledge these emerging challenges. Cowan pointed out that in December 2024, as part of an AI-related consultation, the UK government is considering introducing some form of “personality right.” Such a right would empower individuals, including athletes, with a greater ability to take action against the unauthorized use and manipulation of their image and likeness. This would provide a much-needed mechanism for individuals to protect their public personas and prevent their misrepresentation through AI-generated content. While the current framework offers limited avenues, the conceptualization of a personality right signals a crucial shift towards recognizing and safeguarding the unique identity and reputation of individuals in the digital sphere, finally equipping them with more robust tools to fight against deceptive practices.
For larger organizations, such as football clubs, the legal recourse options are somewhat broader, leveraging existing intellectual property (IP) rights. We’ve all seen social media accounts photoshopping players into the shirts of different teams – a practice that, while often harmless, touches upon sensitive areas for clubs. If a club decided to challenge such an action, particularly if it involved their official kit, they could explore various IP avenues. As Cowan explained, they could investigate whether the content infringes upon the trademark of their crest or the design rights embedded in their official shirt. For these kinds of images, a club – or even an individual acting on behalf of the club – would likely examine these existing IP protections as their primary line of defense. The established legal framework surrounding trademarks and design rights offers a more concrete foundation for clubs to assert their ownership and prevent unauthorized commercial exploitation or misrepresentation of their brand identity.
Even while clubs like Manchester City publicly assert their belief that fans are sophisticated enough to differentiate between official channels and unofficial content for genuine news, images, or videos, the evolving nature of AI-generated content poses a genuine threat. This stance, though understandable in the current climate, might not be sustainable as AI technology advances and deepfakes become increasingly indistinguishable from reality. The lines are blurring, and quickly. The ease with which persuasive-looking, yet entirely fabricated, content can be created and disseminated means that even the most loyal fan base could be susceptible to misinformation or deception. The onus will increasingly fall on clubs and organizations to adapt their strategies, not only in terms of legal recourse but also in educating their audience and developing more sophisticated methods of authentication.
The implications of deepfake technology extend far beyond individual reputation or commercial interests; they touch upon the very nature of trust and truth in the digital age. As the ability to create hyper-realistic fabricated content becomes more accessible, societies will face profound challenges in discerning what is real from what is artificial. This necessitates a multi-faceted approach, encompassing not only robust legal frameworks like personality rights and expanded IP protections but also ethical considerations for AI developers, media literacy initiatives for the general public, and proactive measures by organizations to safeguard their brand and individuals to protect their identity. The “it didn’t happen but looks so realistic” phenomenon demands a collective effort to navigate the murky waters of AI-generated content and ensure that our digital future is built on a foundation of authenticity and accountability.