Denmark is advancing a novel legal framework to empower citizens with ownership rights over their physical and vocal traits, aiming to curb the rise of sophisticated deepfakes and strengthen enforcement against malicious synthetic media.
Denmark is advancing a proposal to give people legal control over their own physical and vocal characteristics, seeking to make it unlawful to distribute AI-generated images, video or audio that imitate a person without consent. According to Time, the amendment would amend copyright law so individuals can prohibit unauthorised deepfakes of their face, voice and other identifying traits and could expose platforms to fines for non-compliance. The government says exemptions would be made for parody and satire.
Proponents argue the change reframes likeness from a privacy concern into a property right, a shift intended to provide clearer legal remedies. The Associated Press reports lawmakers and officials believe copyright-style protection gives victims stronger enforcement tools than existing privacy statutes, enabling takedown requests and compensation claims rather than leaving complainants reliant on slower or murkier regulatory routes.
The move responds to rapid advances in generative media. Coverage in The Guardian and Time highlights how synthesis tools now reconstruct micro-expressions, breathing patterns and speech idiosyncrasies with startling fidelity, increasing the frequency and sophistication of deepfakes. Industry observers point to a dramatic rise in synthetic content and warn that traditional forensic markers are being eroded as models improve.
Beyond reputation, health and safety concerns are central to the argument for reform. Reporting from AP and other outlets has documented instances in which fabricated audio or video has provoked family crises, targeted harassment and real-world danger for victims. Advocates and clinicians warn that people subjected to convincing falsified media can suffer lasting psychological harm and face obstacles proving content is manufactured.
Supporters also say legal clarity would help courts and investigators. By defining misuse of likeness as an ownership violation, prosecutors and defence teams would have a firmer framework for contesting evidence admitted as biometric or testimonial proof, and platforms would have clearer obligations to remove offending material when it violates an individual’s rights. Euronews and AP coverage say the proposed law would enable formal takedown mechanisms while preserving space for legitimate expression such as satire.
The proposal raises wider questions about the reach of any ownership regime. Journalists and commentators note the proposal may prompt claims over gait signatures from camera networks, voiceprints stored by smart devices and behavioural footprints used by predictive systems. The World Economic Forum and other analyses suggest technology companies, many of which trained models on publicly scraped image and audio datasets, are likely to resist stringent restrictions, arguing for technical and commercial standards that balance innovation with individual rights.
Denmark’s approach is not presented as an attempt to halt development but as an effort to re-establish predictable rights around identity at scale. The government has sought cross-party backing and plans public consultation ahead of formal submission later in the year, positioning the change as a potential template for other jurisdictions grappling with synthetic media. Whether other countries follow will shape how much control people retain over the aspects of themselves that AI can now replicate.
Source Reference Map
Inspired by headline at: [1]
Sources by paragraph:
Source: Noah Wire Services
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score:
8
Notes:
The article references events from June 2025, with the latest source dated November 2025. The most recent information is from November 2025, indicating the content is relatively fresh. However, the article was published in February 2026, which is approximately seven months after the events, slightly reducing its freshness.
Quotes check
Score:
7
Notes:
The article includes direct quotes from Danish Culture Minister Jakob Engel-Schmidt, as reported by The Guardian and Time. These quotes are consistent across multiple reputable sources, suggesting they are accurately attributed. However, the absence of direct links to the original sources in the provided context makes it challenging to independently verify the exact wording and context of the quotes.
Source reliability
Score:
9
Notes:
The article cites reputable sources such as The Guardian, Time, and the Associated Press, which are known for their journalistic standards. However, the absence of direct links to these sources in the provided context makes it difficult to assess the full reliability of the information.
Plausibility check
Score:
8
Notes:
The proposal for Denmark to grant citizens copyright over their likeness to combat AI-generated deepfakes aligns with global trends in addressing digital privacy and misinformation. Similar legislative efforts have been reported in other countries, such as the U.S. ‘Take It Down Act’ and France’s digital spaces law. However, the article does not provide specific details on the legislative process or potential challenges, which would be important to assess the feasibility and potential impact of the proposed law.
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): MEDIUM
Summary:
The article provides a comprehensive overview of Denmark’s proposed legislation to grant citizens copyright over their likeness to combat AI-generated deepfakes, citing multiple reputable sources. However, the absence of direct links to these sources and the lack of specific details on the legislative process and potential challenges reduce the overall confidence in the information presented.