Will Britain Introduce New AI Laws to Protect Actors Voices and Faces?

Actors could gain stronger legal protection against artificial intelligence recreating their voices and appearances, with the UK Government confirming that it intends to launch a consultation on digital replicas before the end of 2026.

The commitment was repeated in parliamentary answers on 23 and 26 October, following a major government report that identified gaps in existing protections against unauthorised AI impersonation.

The developments could eventually lead to new legal rights over digitally reproduced voices, faces and performances, although no comprehensive UK digital replica law has yet been introduced.

What has the Government announced?

In March 2026, the UK Government published a report examining copyright and artificial intelligence, including the growing ability of AI systems to create realistic digital copies of individuals.

The report acknowledged that existing legislation does not cover every situation in which a person’s voice or appearance is reproduced without consent.

It also recognised the technology’s legitimate uses in film, television, accessibility and other creative industries.

Among the options identified was a new personality or digital replica right, potentially giving individuals greater control over certain uses of their identities.

The Government has not committed to introducing that specific type of right, but it has confirmed plans for further consultation.

What did ministers say in October?

In a written parliamentary answer on 23 October 2026, minister Ian Murray addressed concerns about creative professionals whose work or likeness is reproduced by AI-generated accounts.

He confirmed that the Government was considering further action, including a consultation on digital replicas and a taskforce examining the labelling of AI-generated content.

Both initiatives are intended to launch before the end of 2026.

A separate answer on 26 October reiterated those plans while discussing the exploitation of performers through unauthorised synthetic content.

The responses provide a more recent indication of the Government’s intentions than the original March report, although they do not establish when legislation might follow.

What is Equity demanding for performers?

Performers’ union Equity has been campaigning for stronger protection over actors’ voices, faces, bodies and performances.

It wants clearer requirements around consent, payment and transparency when AI technology is used to reproduce performers.

In September, Equity confirmed that negotiations with Pact, the trade body representing independent film and television producers, had reached an advanced stage.

The proposed contractual protections include clearer rights relating to digital replicas and an industry commitment to strongly favour human performances.

However, negotiations between producers and performers are different from legislation.

A collective agreement could establish employment protections for productions covered by it, while a new statutory right could potentially apply more widely.

Why are existing contracts causing concern?

The issue is particularly relevant to performers who have previously signed agreements allowing producers to record or reuse their work.

Some contracts were negotiated before modern AI voice cloning and digital performance technology became widely available.

Equity has warned that broad contractual terms can leave performers with limited control over future uses of their recordings or likenesses.

On 23 October, the union issued a warning about a video game casting involving AI and a proposed full assignment of rights.

It advised performers and their agents to exercise extreme caution, while acknowledging that it had not seen the full contractual terms.

The warning illustrates why the debate involves more than whether an AI-generated performance looks or sounds convincing. It also concerns what performers are agreeing to when they sign contracts.

What could a digital replica law actually do?

A new right could potentially allow individuals to challenge specified unauthorised uses of their voices or appearances.

For example, an actor might discover that a synthetic version of their voice has appeared in an advertisement they never agreed to record.

A stronger legal framework could make it easier to establish whether permission was required, who was responsible and what remedies were available.

The Government would need to consider whether a new right should cover all individuals or particular types of commercial exploitation, and how legitimate creative expression would be protected.

It would also need to decide how any new legislation should interact with copyright, performers’ rights, data protection and existing criminal law.

How are other countries approaching the issue?

The Government’s March report examined international developments, including proposals in Denmark and the Netherlands.

Denmark has proposed protections addressing unauthorised digital replicas of performers and members of the public, while certain US states already have laws concerning digital likenesses and synthetic performances.

The UK could consider elements of these approaches, although its legal framework differs from those jurisdictions.

Film and television producers have also highlighted the creative and financial benefits of authorised digital replicas, particularly for visual effects, dubbing and accessibility.

A future law would therefore need to distinguish harmful impersonation from legitimate uses agreed by performers and rights holders.

When could new UK AI laws come into force?

There is currently no confirmed date for a comprehensive UK digital replica right.

The immediate development is the Government’s intended consultation and AI labelling taskforce, both announced for launch before the end of 2026.

Any new statutory right would require further policy decisions and the appropriate legislative process before coming into force.

Meanwhile, the Save Our Voices Now parliamentary petition has exceeded 10,000 signatures, requiring a Government response to its call for stronger protection over people’s voices.

The petition does not itself create new legislation, but it adds public pressure to an issue already under consideration by ministers.

For performers and the wider public, the next significant developments will be the promised consultation, the outcome of Equity’s negotiations and the Government’s response to the petition.