The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence has given creators and inventors new technological tools to enhance their work — but it has also made it increasingly challenging for Americans to safeguard their intellectual property, identities, and reputations. AI “deepfake” technology has enabled scammers and bad actors to digitally clone the voices and likenesses of all individuals — including creators, artists, and everyday Americans — which they can then exploit illegally for profit without consent or knowledge. This predatory strategy threatens innovation and creative output, as it harms creators’ ability to receive fair compensation from their IP and exposes anyone to reputational and economic harm from unauthorized digital replicas.
A bipartisan coalition in Congress is seeking to address this growing problem through the Nurture Originals, Foster Art, and Keep Entertainment Safe (NO FAKES) Act, which would establish a federal right to control digital replicas and protect against exploitation. Unfortunately, some vocal opponents of IP rights are pushing back. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) published an article arguing that the NO FAKES Act is not necessary and would lead to over-censorship of creators and harm innovation.
EFF’s claims about the NO FAKES Act mischaracterize the bill and its likely effects. In reality, the NO FAKES Act is an urgently needed reform that establishes common-sense protections and would benefit all Americans — not just creators. Below, we set the record straight:
| Claim: NO FAKES will inevitably lead to over-censorship. |
| In reality: EFF’s claim that the NO FAKES Act will lead to over-censorship of real creativity and free speech is speculation that overlooks the already-observable real harm being inflicted on creators and others alike. The bill contains numerous safeguards specifically to ensure that non-infringing content is protected from wrongful takedowns. It includes penalties for false or deceptive notices, meaning that anyone who knowingly and falsely reports that a replica is unauthorized will be liable for $5,000 or more in damages. Furthermore, the bill explicitly protects First Amendment activities by ensuring AI replicas used in news, documentaries, satire, and parody are exempted from liability. These provisions ensure that unauthorized commercial exploitation will be curtailed while legitimate public discourse and creative expression remain unhindered. In all of EFF’s hypotheticals, people whose content or AI tools are wrongly flagged for violating other individuals’ IP rights will have clear legal recourse to defend themselves. But under the status quo, many individuals and creators whose likenesses are copied by AI have no recourse — the extent of their rights depends on a patchwork of uneven and often outdated state laws. The NO FAKES Act levels the playing field and ensures that creators have the minimum legal tools needed to enforce their IP rights against theft. |
| Claim: NO FAKES will be a “disaster” for innovation. |
| In reality: The opposite is true. The NO FAKES Act is a vital reform to ensure that innovators can thrive, especially within the creative industries. Creators’ control over their IP, including their likenesses and voices, is what creates the essential incentive for artists to take creative risks, develop their craft, and publish their work. But if creators of AI “deepfakes” are allowed to infringe these rights — such as by copying a musical artist’s voice — and profit off that infringement, it can harm demand for the artist’s genuine work, undermining their ability to earn a living from their creativity and talent. The proliferation of AI “deepfakes” could also undermine artists’ and creators’ public image and reputation. This risk creates an incentive for creators not to create and publish new works that could be used to fuel future AI copycats. By defending individuals across the country from unauthorized AI copying, the NO FAKES Act would protect against these risks, ensuring that all kinds of artists and creators remain encouraged to produce innovative art, music, and other creative works. It would also strengthen the U.S. economy. As of 2023, the creative industries contributed $1.2 trillion to the U.S. economy and supported 5.4 million jobs. The stable federal protections created by the NO FAKES Act would ensure these industries remain stable and can thrive for years to come while AI technology advances. |
| Claim: The NO FAKES Act is made redundant by the 2025 “Take It Down” Act. |
| In reality: The “Take It Down” Act and the NO FAKES Act are both vital and serve entirely different purposes. The “Take It Down” Act was specifically designed to combat non-consensual intimate imagery and sexual deepfakes created by AI. However, it was not designed to protect an individual’s professional identity or the economic value of their likeness in other contexts, such as music, film, or advertisements. The NO FAKES Act would fill that gap by establishing a clear, enforceable, federally protected right for all individuals to have control over their own voice and likeness, regardless of the context in which it is used. EFF’s argument that lawmakers should “wait to see” whether the “Take It Down” Act succeeds at its goals before passing the NO FAKES Act misses the point. Nothing about the “Take It Down” Act — or any other bill focusing on combating harmful AI replicas that has been enacted to date — makes NO FAKES obsolete. However, waiting to pass the NO FAKES Act until AI exploitation of hardworking creators has grown impossible to ignore could allow IP thieves to severely damage the U.S. economy and the output of our world-leading creative industries. |