Preventing Abuse of Digital Replicas Act

(a) Findings. Congress finds the following:

(1) Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) technology, including generative AI technology, represent an important opportunity for continued technological leadership by the United States in a critical and emerging technology area.

(2) Leadership in AI development will be vital for the United States economy and the competitiveness of American businesses abroad, as well as for the national security of the United States.

(3) Excessive regulation of AI technology development and applications would hinder their advancement and place the United States at a disadvantage compared to strategic competitors, including the People’s Republic of China.

(4) AI technology and its myriad applications are already subject to numerous existing laws and regulations, including at the Federal level, which should be considered when determining whether further legislation or regulation is necessary.

(5) AI technology is already starting to transform numerous industries, create new industries and markets, and contribute to countless new products and services that benefit American consumers and consumers abroad, including with respect to health care, communications, transportation and mobility, education, and entertainment.

(6) While AI technology will provide many benefits to Americans, it also presents significant risks to individuals and society in general, one of which is the abuse of deepfakes and other digital replicas.

(7) The internet is already plagued with countless advertisements and other media using unauthorized, AI-generated digital replicas of individuals to falsely imply those individuals’ endorsement of various products, services, businesses, and other entities.

(8) Abusive use of an unauthorized digital replica to fraudulently ascribe endorsement or other statements to a person without his or her knowledge or consent can cause tremendous distress and inflict serious harm on that person as well as his or her reputation, dignity, and livelihood.

(9) False endorsements, advertisements, or other commercial speech or promotion using unauthorized AI-generated digital replicas can also cause substantial confusion and harm to consumers, including by fraudulently inducing them to purchase and use dangerous products that pose risks to their health and safety based on the consumers’ mistaken belief that a trusted individual endorsed the products.

(10) Section 43 of the Trademark Act of 1946 already provides a cause of action for the improper use in commerce of a replica of a person’s name, image, likeness, signature or device, voice, logo, etc.

(11) Some individuals have encountered difficulties in some jurisdictions in protecting their rights via section 43, such as due to their lack of general fame or their lack of the resources necessary to gather sufficient evidence of consumer confusion, as may be required under the case law of certain jurisdictions.

(12) Due to the seriousness of the potential harms and the high risk of consumer confusion when the prohibited activity involves the use of an identical or indistinguishable digital replica of an individual’s face or voice or other identifying personal characteristics, the amendments to section 43 of the Trademark Act of 1946 in this Act are necessary to provide protection against such abuses throughout the country.

(b) Sense of Congress. It is the sense of Congress that the Trademark Act of 1946 should remain constrained to its historical scope, prevent the improper recapture of works in the public domain, and avoid conflicting with copyright laws that govern primarily creative expression, including when aided by AI technology such as in films depicting historical figures or music that samples preexisting audio.