New York has enacted a pair of first‑in‑the‑nation laws that seek to regulate artificial intelligence in advertising while strengthening protections for the commercial use of deceased persons’ identities. Governor Kathy Hochul signed Senate Bill S.8420‑A and Assembly Bill A.8882 on 11 December 2025, creating a disclosure regime for AI‑generated “synthetic performers” and expanding posthumous publicity rights under Civil Rights Law § 50‑f. [1][2]

The synthetic‑performer statute amends General Business Law § 396‑b to require advertisers doing business in New York to include a conspicuous disclosure when an advertisement contains a “synthetic performer” and the advertiser has actual knowledge of its use. The law defines “synthetic performer” and “generative AI” broadly to cover machine‑learning models and algorithmic technologies capable of producing images, video or audio. Civil penalties are capped at $1,000 for a first violation and $5,000 for subsequent violations, and liability is limited to content creators and sponsors rather than distributors such as networks or streaming services. Exemptions include audio‑only advertisements, uses solely for language translation and certain promotional materials tied to expressive works. [1][3][4]

The posthumous publicity amendment to § 50‑f extends statutory protection to deceased personalities domiciled in New York at death and expressly covers names, images, signatures, voices and “digital replicas” , computer‑generated representations identifiable as a deceased person. The statute bars commercial exploitation of those attributes without prior consent from specified representatives such as heirs or executors, and it dispenses with the prior requirement that plaintiffs show consumer confusion or implied endorsement. Remedies include statutory damages of $2,000 or actual damages, whichever is greater, disgorgement of profits attributable to the unauthorised use and, in appropriate cases, punitive damages; the burden shifts to defendants to prove deductible expenses once gross revenue is shown. [1][2]

Both statutes preserve expressive‑work and First Amendment exceptions. Parody, satire, political commentary, journalism, documentaries, biographical works and incidental or de minimis uses remain outside the scope of liability, although the law makes clear an exception will not apply where an allegedly exempt work contains a use “so directly connected” with a product or solicitation as to constitute advertising. Platform and intermediary liability is similarly constrained: service providers that merely display or license digital replicas are shielded unless they receive written notice from a rights holder asserting unauthorised use and then fail to remove content as soon as technically and practically feasible. Publishers, broadcasters and advertising intermediaries are likewise protected unless they had actual knowledge of the unauthorised use prior to dissemination. [1]

Legislators and industry groups framed the measures as a pragmatic response to rapidly evolving generative‑AI capabilities. Senator Michael Gianaris, sponsor of the synthetic‑performer bill, said the law aims to protect workers in the entertainment industry from being supplanted by synthetic simulations, while Assemblymember Linda Rosenthal said it will help consumers distinguish between real and AI‑generated content. Governor Hochul praised the legislation, saying “We are setting a clear standard that keeps pace with technology while protecting artists and consumers long after the credits roll.” [1][2]

SAG‑AFTRA welcomed the package as a landmark step. National Executive Director Duncan Crabtree‑Ireland described the new laws as “smart, forward‑looking legislation that will have national impact.” New York Local President Ezra Knight and Chief Labor Policy Officer Rebecca Damon reiterated the union’s position that technology should serve artists rather than replace or exploit them. Industry stakeholders have signalled support for transparency requirements even as some cautioned about implementation questions, exemptions and the potential for litigation over borderline expressive uses. [1]

The legislation replaces notice‑based or confusion‑centric standards with affirmative disclosure and consent obligations, signalling a shift toward regulating the provenance and commercial exploitation of synthetic and posthumous likenesses rather than relying solely on traditional trademark or unfair‑competition doctrines. Government statements and the legislative text frame the laws as narrowly targeted, with civil penalties and statutory damages designed to create enforcement pathways without criminal sanctions. [2][3][4]

As New York becomes the first U.S. jurisdiction to adopt parallel regimes addressing both AI‑generated performance and digital legacy protection, the new statutes are likely to influence national industry norms and prompt scrutiny of how platforms, advertisers and estates will operationalise disclosure, consent and takedown obligations. The laws also set the stage for future disputes over the limits of expressive‑work exemptions and the technical means by which “digital replicas” will be identified and removed in practice. [1][2][3]

📌 Reference Map:

##Reference Map:

  • [1] (Vital Law) - Paragraph 1, Paragraph 2, Paragraph 3, Paragraph 4, Paragraph 5, Paragraph 6, Paragraph 7, Paragraph 8
  • [2] (Office of the Governor of New York) - Paragraph 1, Paragraph 3, Paragraph 5, Paragraph 8
  • [3] (New York State Senate) - Paragraph 2, Paragraph 7, Paragraph 8
  • [4] (New York State Senate) - Paragraph 2, Paragraph 7, Paragraph 8
  • [5] (New York State Senate) - Paragraph 2
  • [6] (New York State Senate) - Paragraph 2
  • [7] (New York State Senate) - Paragraph 2

Source: Noah Wire Services