Introduction to whether you should be able to copyright your face
As technology continues to grow and develop at a faster pace than we can keep track of, the rise of artificial intelligence is inevitable. One key concern regarding the power and potential of artificial intelligence is whether it can clone your voice, recreate your face with frightening, realistic fidelity, and even deepfake you into fictional scenarios. These actions are being taken without your consent.
Celebrities and public figures worldwide have always dealt with impersonations, but never everyday people going about their daily lives. Ordinary people are finding that their faces and voices are being stolen, manipulated, and shared, sometimes maliciously.
Many, including myself, see this as an attack on personal identity and erosion of individual agency, prompting pressing and ethical debates. This raises the question: Should people be able to copyright their faces and voices to combat this technological advancement?
This question and idea, once confined to science fiction, is now becoming a legal reality in Denmark, the first country in the world to announce legislation granting individuals the right to copyright their likeness and voice. Currently, Denmark is the only country trailing this, but what would it mean if this were to become a global norm, and if it does, should it?
Copyright Your Face: Denmark’s Approach
In June 2025, Denmark announced that it would allow people to copyright their faces and voices, which would legally recognise the use of a person’s face and voice without their permission, generally for commercial or artificial intelligence purposes, and would be liable for legal penalties. Initially, this may seem like a harsh overreaction; however, it signals a shift in how governments view artificial intelligence and its potential for good.
This is an attempt to address the growing number of disturbing deepfakes and the broader issue of AI’s use of biometric data, which enables individuals to protect themselves or reclaim ownership of their digital identity in the realm of intellectual property. As artificial intelligence continues to grow in its usage and capabilities, more information is being fed into these models to enable their development. This information is often massive datasets, including voices and faces, all collected without consent.
Arguments for and against this new approach
One argument for being able to copyright your face, voice, and likeness is that it gives individuals autonomy over their face and voice, allowing them to dictate and control its use. The artificial intelligence companies’ ability to use these without your permission undermines the very idea of personal agency. This is a human right: not to be exploited.
However, an argument against being able to copyright these is that placing legal restrictions on what artificial intelligence can and cannot use to train its models is slowing down and hindering the progress of legitimate artificial intelligence research. For instance, in fields like art, journalism, or education, the application of artificial intelligence is highly beneficial for those who need it.
However, imposing restrictions on their capabilities will ultimately hinder the growth and development of these industries. In addition, when training AI models, the companies behind them will now have to obtain explicit permission from the individuals involved, which will drastically slow down the development of said AI models. Despite this, Denmark and its government have asserted that the law will strike a balance between innovation and safeguarding personal rights and will encourage the ethical development of artificial intelligence.
However, countering this viewpoint, we need protection against exploitation, as the damage that some artificial intelligence can inflict upon people and groups is devastating. For example, artificial intelligence-generated pornography is a widespread issue and a talking point which takes someone’s face without their consent and uses it in adult content. This misuse of the person’s face will and does cause real, serious emotional, reputational and financial harm. For example, with the new laws in Denmark, individuals have been empowered to take legal action and protect themselves against any company or individual that uses their face, voice, or likeness without permission.
Despite this seeming like a fantastic idea, the question arises of how enforceable and practically enforceable it would be if we could globally copyright our faces. Tracking, policing, and tackling unauthorised uses of trademarks and intellectual property is already time-consuming and labour-intensive.
How much more would it be to track faces and voices globally? This is practically impossible for most people, so a way to make it easily possible must be discussed. In addition, the question of what the cost would be for someone to safeguard their face, voice and likeness. Would it be something that ordinary people can easily and cheaply do? Otherwise, this may lead to the further exploitation of those who cannot afford to protect themselves, while those with money can.
Conclusion
In our ever-growing world, where AI can now synthesise and create perfect replicas and clones of you, the ownership of your image is no longer just a philosophical topic, but a legal, economic, and personal matter. Denmark is the first to step forward and adapt its laws to counter the growing development of AI, giving its people the power to protect their most fundamental property: their identity. Whether you should be able to copyright your face is still up for debate and will continue to be, but the most important takeaway is that the legal question of who owns “you” has never been more paramount and urgent.
