Making AI images of people is not always illegal, but it can be, and the legal risk depends heavily on what kind of image you make, who the person is, and how you use or share it. The answer in 2026 is more complex than it was just two years ago.
Federal law caught up to this issue in 2024. The DEFIANCE Act and the TAKE IT DOWN Act both passed, creating the first meaningful federal civil and criminal frameworks for nonconsensual AI-generated intimate images. State laws have also proliferated rapidly.
The part most people miss: the legal exposure is not limited to sexual content. Defamation, right of publicity violations, and harassment claims can all arise from AI images that are entirely non-sexual but false, damaging, or targeted.
This article covers every major legal framework that applies in 2026, which states have the strongest laws, what the specific penalties are, and exactly which types of AI images create the most legal risk.
Is It Illegal to Make AI Images of People?
Making AI images of people is not automatically illegal, but it becomes illegal under several conditions: when the image is sexually explicit and created without consent, when it is designed to defame or deceive, when it uses a person’s likeness for commercial gain without permission, or when it constitutes targeted harassment. The specific law that applies depends on the content and context.
The general act of generating an AI image that depicts a real person doing something they did not do is not criminal under federal law or in most states, unless it falls into one of the legally prohibited categories. Creating a stylized portrait of a celebrity, generating a humorous parody image clearly labeled as fake, or producing artistic depictions generally stays within legal boundaries.
The legal risk increases sharply when the image is realistic enough to be mistaken for a genuine photograph, when it depicts the subject in a sexually explicit, defamatory, or criminal context, when it is shared publicly, and when the subject is a private person rather than a public figure.
Four separate legal theories can apply to AI-generated images of real people: right of publicity (commercial use of likeness without consent), defamation (false statements of fact that damage reputation), invasion of privacy (false light, intrusion, or appropriation), and in sexual content cases, specific nonconsensual intimate imagery statutes.
Quick Facts:
- No single federal law bans all AI images of real people
- The DEFIANCE Act of 2024 created federal civil remedies for nonconsensual sexual AI images
- At least 20 states have deepfake or AI image statutes as of 2026
- Right of publicity laws exist in most states and apply to commercial AI image use
- Defamation law applies when AI images make false factual claims about real people
Is It Illegal to Make AI Images of Real People?
Making AI images of real people without their consent is not automatically illegal, but the legality depends entirely on what the image depicts, how it is used, and whether it falls within a legally prohibited category. The default position is that AI image creation is legally unregulated outside of specific content types.
The legal framework surrounding AI images of real people in 2026 is built from existing legal doctrines applied to new technology rather than from a single comprehensive statute. Courts, regulators, and state legislatures are actively expanding the legal framework, but significant gaps remain.
The clearest illegal categories are: nonconsensual sexual AI images covered by the DEFIANCE Act and state deepfake laws; defamatory images that falsely portray someone committing crimes or engaging in conduct that harms their reputation; and commercial uses of a person’s likeness without their consent in states with robust right of publicity laws.
The least regulated category is non-commercial, non-sexual, clearly fictional depictions of real people. Fan art, satirical images clearly labeled as parody, and artistic portrayals that do not make false factual claims generally remain legally protected under First Amendment principles in 2026.
| AI Image Type | Legal Risk Level | Primary Legal Theory |
|---|---|---|
| Sexual/intimate content without consent | Very high | DEFIANCE Act; state deepfake statutes |
| Defamatory false depiction | High | Defamation law |
| Commercial use of likeness without consent | High | Right of publicity |
| Realistic fake depicting criminal conduct | High | Defamation per se |
| Clearly labeled satire or parody | Low | First Amendment protection |
| Non-commercial artistic portrait | Low to moderate | Right of publicity (varies by state) |
| Election interference content | High in some states | State election deepfake laws |
Is It Legal to Create AI Images of Someone?
Creating AI images of someone is legal in some contexts and illegal in others, and the same image can be legal to create but illegal to share, or legal to share privately but illegal to publish commercially. The analysis requires looking at the specific content, the purpose, and the distribution method.
Legally protected AI image creation includes: clearly labeled satirical or parody content, artistic depictions that do not claim to be realistic, fan art in non-commercial contexts, and fictional scenarios that do not make false factual claims about the subject’s real conduct.
Legally prohibited AI image creation includes: sexually explicit images of real people without their consent under the DEFIANCE Act and state laws, images designed to defame, images used commercially without right of publicity authorization, and in several states, deepfakes of politicians near election periods.
The “clearly labeled” distinction is important. An AI image that depicts a celebrity in a fictional scenario labeled as AI-generated satire is treated very differently by courts than a realistic-looking image designed to be mistaken for a real photograph. The intent to deceive and the realistic quality of the image are factors in multiple legal claims.
Factors courts consider in AI image legality:
- Whether the image was realistic enough to be mistaken for a real photograph
- Whether the creator intended the image to be believed as real
- Whether the image was shared publicly or kept private
- Whether the image depicted sexual, defamatory, or criminally false content
- Whether the image was used for commercial gain
- Whether the subject is a public figure or a private person
AI Generated Images of Real People Laws
AI generated images of real people are governed in 2026 by a combination of federal statutes enacted in 2024, state deepfake laws enacted between 2019 and 2026, and existing legal doctrines including defamation law, right of publicity, and invasion of privacy. No single federal law covers all types of AI images of real people.
The federal legislative response accelerated in 2024. The DEFIANCE Act created federal civil liability for nonconsensual intimate AI images. The TAKE IT DOWN Act, also passed in 2024 and signed into law in 2025, requires online platforms to remove nonconsensual intimate imagery including AI-generated content within 48 hours of notification, with criminal penalties for publishing it.
At the state level, California, Texas, Virginia, Georgia, and New York are among the states that have enacted the most specific AI image legislation. California leads with multiple statutes covering sexual deepfakes, election deepfakes, and the right of publicity for AI-generated likenesses. Texas has a comprehensive deepfake statute. Virginia has one of the oldest state laws criminalizing nonconsensual intimate deepfakes.
The rapid pace of state-level legislation means the legal map for AI images of real people changes significantly each year. As of 2026, at least 20 states have enacted some form of deepfake or AI image statute, and several more have legislation pending.
Key Takeaway: AI images of real people are governed by a patchwork of federal and state laws that expanded significantly in 2024 and 2025. The legal framework is still developing, but the specific categories of illegal AI images are now clearer than at any prior point.
Federal Deepfake Law
Federal deepfake law as of 2026 is primarily composed of two statutes enacted in 2024: the DEFIANCE Act and the TAKE IT DOWN Act. Neither creates a general prohibition on all AI images of real people, but together they create the first meaningful federal framework for the most harmful categories of AI-generated content.
The DEFIANCE Act (Disrupt Explicit Forged Images and Non-Consensual Edits Act of 2024) created a federal civil cause of action for victims of nonconsensual AI-generated intimate imagery. The law allows victims to sue in federal court for compensatory damages, punitive damages, and attorneys’ fees. The statute of limitations is ten years from the date of discovery of the image.
The TAKE IT DOWN Act requires online platforms to remove nonconsensual intimate imagery, including AI-generated content, within 48 hours of a victim’s notification. Platforms that fail to comply face enforcement action by the FTC. The act also creates criminal liability for individuals who knowingly publish such images with intent to harm.
Prior to these 2024 statutes, federal deepfake law was limited to election-related provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act and scattered provisions in existing fraud and harassment statutes. The 2024 laws represented a significant expansion of federal authority into the AI image space.
| Federal Statute | Year | What It Covers | Remedy Available |
|---|---|---|---|
| DEFIANCE Act | 2024 | Nonconsensual AI intimate images | Civil damages; attorneys’ fees |
| TAKE IT DOWN Act | 2024 (signed 2025) | Platform removal; publishing prohibition | FTC enforcement; criminal penalties |
| NDAA Deepfake Provisions | 2019 | Election deepfake disclosure | Regulatory framework |
| 47 U.S.C. Section 230 (as modified) | Ongoing | Platform liability exceptions | Platform-specific |
DEFIANCE Act and AI Images
The DEFIANCE Act is the most significant federal law governing AI-generated images of real people as of 2026. It applies specifically to nonconsensual intimate images that are AI-generated or digitally altered, creating a federal civil remedy for victims that supplements state-level criminal statutes.
The DEFIANCE Act’s civil cause of action allows any person who is identifiable in a nonconsensual intimate AI-generated image to sue in federal district court. The plaintiff does not need to prove that the image was distributed; creating and possessing the image with intent to share it is sufficient in some interpretations. Actual distribution that causes harm is the clearest basis for a claim.
Damages under the DEFIANCE Act include actual damages (including lost income, emotional distress, and reputational harm), statutory damages of up to $150,000 per violation in cases of willful violations, and attorneys’ fees when the plaintiff prevails. The ten-year statute of limitations from discovery is longer than most state statutes, giving victims more time to bring claims.
The DEFIANCE Act specifically covers AI-generated images, not just traditional photographs or videos. This was a deliberate legislative choice to ensure the statute would apply to content generated by tools like Midjourney, Stable Diffusion, and similar AI platforms.
DEFIANCE Act key provisions:
- Applies to: nonconsensual intimate AI-generated or digitally altered images
- Who can sue: Any identifiable victim depicted in covered images
- Damages: Actual damages plus up to $150,000 statutory damages per violation
- Statute of limitations: 10 years from discovery
- Attorneys’ fees: Available to prevailing plaintiffs
- Platform application: Complements but does not replace TAKE IT DOWN Act platform obligations
Deepfake Laws by State
Deepfake laws by state vary significantly in their scope, the conduct they cover, the penalty classifications, and whether they create civil remedies alongside criminal penalties. As of 2026, at least 20 states have enacted deepfake-specific legislation, with several more addressing AI images through existing harassment, privacy, or right of publicity statutes.
California is the state with the most comprehensive AI image legislation. California AB 602 (effective 2023) creates a civil cause of action for sexual deepfakes. California AB 730 (effective 2020) addresses election deepfakes. California Civil Code Section 3344.1 addresses the right of publicity for AI-generated likenesses of deceased celebrities.
Virginia enacted one of the earliest state deepfake laws. Virginia Code Section 18.2-386.2 criminalizes the creation and distribution of nonconsensual pornographic deepfakes as a Class 1 misdemeanor for a first offense, escalating to a Class 6 felony for subsequent offenses or when minors are involved.
Texas enacted Texas HB 4337 addressing election deepfakes, and has separate provisions addressing nonconsensual intimate deepfakes. Georgia Code Section 16-11-90 covers nonconsensual distribution of intimate visual material including AI-generated content.
| State | Statute | Covers | Classification | Penalty |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| California | AB 602 (2023) | Sexual deepfakes (civil) | Civil cause of action | Damages and fees |
| Virginia | Code 18.2-386.2 | Sexual deepfakes (criminal) | Class 1 misdemeanor / Class 6 felony | Up to 5 years |
| Georgia | Code 16-11-90 | Nonconsensual intimate imagery | Misdemeanor / felony | Up to 5 years |
| New York | Civil Rights Law 50-f | AI likeness rights | Civil cause of action | Damages |
| Texas | HB 4337 | Election deepfakes | Class A misdemeanor | Up to 1 year |
| Illinois | HB 4667 | Sexual deepfakes | Class A misdemeanor | Up to 1 year |
Is It Illegal to Make Sexual AI Images of Someone?
Yes, making sexual AI images of someone without their consent is illegal under federal law and under the laws of at least 20 states as of 2026. This is the clearest and most consistently prohibited category of AI image creation in US law.
The DEFIANCE Act of 2024 creates federal civil liability for nonconsensual intimate AI-generated images. The TAKE IT DOWN Act creates criminal liability for knowingly publishing such images with intent to harm. Together, these statutes mean that creating and sharing a sexual AI image of a real person without consent can result in both civil lawsuits and federal criminal charges.
At the state level, the criminal penalties range from misdemeanor classification (Class A misdemeanor in Illinois, up to one year in jail) to felony classification (Virginia Class 6 felony for repeat offenses, up to five years in prison). California provides civil remedies including damages. Georgia provides both criminal penalties and civil remedies.
The legal prohibition applies to private individuals and celebrities equally. The subject’s fame does not reduce their legal protection against nonconsensual sexual AI images. In fact, celebrities and high-profile individuals have additional resources to pursue these claims aggressively.
Key legal thresholds for sexual AI images:
- Creating and possessing with intent to distribute: Potential violation of DEFIANCE Act
- Creating and distributing: Federal civil liability plus state criminal exposure
- Creating of a minor: Covered by federal child exploitation statutes with severe mandatory penalties
- Creating of a public figure: Same legal framework applies; no reduced protection for public figures
- Creating with the subject’s consent: Generally lawful; consent is a complete defense
Key Takeaway: Sexual AI images of real people without consent are the most clearly illegal category of AI image content under both federal law and the laws of at least 20 states. The DEFIANCE Act provides federal civil remedies, and state laws provide criminal penalties ranging from misdemeanors to felonies.
Right of Publicity and AI Images
The right of publicity is a legal doctrine that gives individuals the exclusive right to control commercial use of their name, image, likeness, and identity. AI-generated images of real people that are used for commercial purposes without consent violate this right in most US states.
Right of publicity law exists in approximately 35 states, though the scope of protection varies significantly. States like California, New York, and Tennessee have the broadest right of publicity protections. California Civil Code Section 3344 protects living individuals; California Civil Code Section 3344.1 (the Astaire Celebrity Rights Act) protects deceased celebrities and was expanded to cover AI-generated likenesses.
New York enacted Civil Rights Law Section 50-f in 2024, specifically addressing AI-generated likenesses of deceased individuals in a commercial context. Tennessee’s ELVIS Act (Ensuring Likeness Voice and Image Security Act), enacted in 2024, was the first state law specifically targeting AI voice and likeness cloning, protecting all individuals, not just celebrities.
The right of publicity applies to commercial use, not to all uses. A non-commercial artistic AI portrait of a celebrity generally does not violate the right of publicity. The same image used in an advertisement, a product endorsement, or any revenue-generating context without consent is a clear right of publicity violation.
Right of publicity coverage by state:
| State | Statute | Living Persons | Deceased | AI Specificity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| California | Civil Code 3344 / 3344.1 | Yes | Yes; 70 years post-death | Amended for AI |
| New York | Civil Rights Law 50-f | Yes | Yes (recent expansion) | AI-specific (2024) |
| Tennessee | ELVIS Act (2024) | Yes | Yes | AI voice and likeness |
| Texas | Tex. Prop. Code 26.001 | Yes | 50 years post-death | General |
| Illinois | Right of Publicity Act | Yes | 50 years post-death | General |
AI Image Defamation Laws
AI image defamation occurs when a generated image falsely depicts a real person doing something they did not do, in a way that damages their reputation. Standard defamation law applies to AI images just as it applies to written or spoken false statements.
Defamation requires a false statement of fact (not opinion), publication to a third party, fault (negligence for private persons, actual malice for public figures), and resulting damages. An AI image that realistically depicts a politician committing a crime they did not commit, shared as if it were real, meets all four elements of defamation.
The key legal distinction is between realistic images presented as real versus clearly labeled satire or parody. A photorealistic AI image of a CEO signing a fraudulent document, shared without any indication it is AI-generated, is defamatory if it damages the CEO’s reputation. The same image clearly labeled “AI-generated satire” is much more likely to be protected by the First Amendment.
Defamation per se applies when the false depiction falls into specific categories: falsely portraying someone as having committed a crime, as being dishonest in their profession, as having a loathsome disease, or as engaging in conduct widely considered immoral. AI images that fall into defamation per se categories do not require the plaintiff to prove specific monetary damages.
What makes an AI image defamatory:
- The image realistically depicts the subject in a false scenario
- The image is presented without clear indication that it is AI-generated
- The depicted scenario would damage a reasonable person’s reputation
- The image is shared with at least one third party
- The creator acted with at least negligence about the image’s falseness
Is It Illegal to Make AI Images of Celebrities?
Making AI images of celebrities is legal in some contexts and illegal in others. The celebrity’s public figure status provides some reduced legal protection against defamation claims compared to private individuals, but it does not reduce their right of publicity protections and does not eliminate protections against nonconsensual sexual AI images.
Non-commercial, clearly labeled AI art of celebrities generally falls within protected expression under the First Amendment. Fan communities have long created artistic depictions of public figures, and AI-generated art continues in that tradition when it is clearly fictional and non-commercial.
Commercial use of a celebrity’s AI-generated likeness without consent violates right of publicity law in most states. An advertisement, a branded product, or any monetized content featuring an AI-generated celebrity likeness without that celebrity’s authorization creates substantial right of publicity liability.
Defamatory AI images of celebrities require proof of actual malice by the creator, meaning the creator knew the depicted scenario was false or acted with reckless disregard for its truth. This is a higher standard than applies to private persons, but successful defamation claims against AI image creators by public figures have been filed in state courts.
Celebrity AI image legality by context:
- Clearly labeled fan art (non-commercial): Generally legal under First Amendment
- Commercial advertisement using AI celebrity likeness: Illegal without consent (right of publicity)
- Realistic image falsely depicting criminal conduct: Defamation (actual malice required)
- Sexual AI image without consent: Illegal under DEFIANCE Act and state laws
- Election-related deepfake: Illegal in states with election deepfake statutes
- Satire clearly labeled as AI-generated fiction: Generally protected
Is It Illegal to Make AI Images of Politicians?
Making AI images of politicians is legal for satire and commentary but is specifically restricted in several states for election-related deepfake content. Politicians, as public figures, have reduced defamation protections but retain full right of publicity and sexual deepfake protections.
Election deepfake laws are the most rapidly developing category of AI image legislation in 2026. California AB 730 (effective 2020) prohibits the distribution of materially deceptive audio or visual media of a candidate within 60 days of an election. Texas HB 4337 creates similar restrictions for election deepfakes. Minnesota, Michigan, and several other states have enacted or are considering election deepfake statutes.
The First Amendment protects satire of politicians. A clearly labeled AI-generated parody of a politician’s statements or appearance is protected expression, a tradition that goes back centuries in American political discourse. The legal line is between obvious satire and realistic deception designed to influence electoral outcomes.
Federal election law at 52 U.S.C. Section 30121 and related provisions may apply when AI images of politicians are used in paid political advertising or coordinated campaign activities. The FEC has been developing guidance on AI use in political advertising that will affect how AI images of politicians can be used in campaign contexts.
AI images of politicians: legal by scenario:
| Scenario | Legal Status | Governing Law |
|---|---|---|
| Clearly labeled satirical cartoon | Legal | First Amendment protection |
| Realistic deepfake near election period | Illegal in some states | California AB 730; Texas HB 4337 |
| Sexual AI image without consent | Illegal | DEFIANCE Act; state statutes |
| False criminal depiction shared as real | Defamation (actual malice) | State defamation law |
| Commercial use of political likeness | Right of publicity issue | State right of publicity law |
Can You Be Sued for Making AI Images of Someone?
Yes, you can be sued for making AI images of someone under several legal theories depending on the content and how it was used. Civil lawsuits for AI image creation and distribution are increasingly common, and the legal framework supporting them strengthened significantly in 2024.
Right of publicity civil claims are available to virtually anyone whose AI-generated likeness is used commercially without consent. These claims can result in actual damages (lost licensing fees, reputational harm, emotional distress) and in some states statutory damages and attorneys’ fees.
Defamation civil claims are available to private individuals whose reputation was damaged by false AI-generated depictions. Public figures must prove actual malice, but private individuals only need to prove negligence. Successful defamation cases involving AI images have resulted in settlements and judgments ranging from thousands to millions of dollars.
Under the DEFIANCE Act, victims of nonconsensual sexual AI images can sue in federal court for up to $150,000 in statutory damages per willful violation plus actual damages and attorneys’ fees. This federal civil remedy is separate from and in addition to any state criminal penalties.
Civil lawsuit exposure for AI image creators:
- Right of publicity violation: Actual damages plus statutory damages in some states
- Defamation: Compensatory damages; punitive damages for malice
- DEFIANCE Act (sexual AI images): Up to $150,000 statutory damages plus actual damages
- Invasion of privacy: Compensatory and punitive damages
- Intentional infliction of emotional distress: Compensatory and punitive damages
AI Images Without Consent Laws
AI images without consent laws cover several distinct legal categories, and the consent analysis differs depending on which legal theory applies. Right of publicity consent rules, sexual AI image consent rules, and defamation law each treat consent differently.
For right of publicity purposes, consent means explicit authorization for the specific commercial use of a person’s AI-generated likeness. A broad media consent signed for a different purpose does not automatically authorize AI image generation. Several states require that likeness consents specifically address AI-generated content to be enforceable for that purpose.
For sexual AI image purposes under the DEFIANCE Act and state laws, the only consent that matters is explicit consent from the depicted person to the creation and distribution of sexually explicit AI-generated content. This consent must be specific, informed, and revocable. California’s AB 602 specifically requires written consent for commercially distributed sexual deepfakes.
Defamation law does not involve a consent framework in the traditional sense. A person cannot consent to being defamed. The relevant question in defamation is truth versus falsity, not consent to depiction.
Consent requirements by legal theory:
- Right of publicity: Explicit authorization for specific commercial likeness use required
- Sexual AI images (DEFIANCE Act): Explicit, specific, revocable consent required
- Defamation: Not a consent framework; truth is the primary defense
- General artistic depiction: No consent required for non-commercial, non-sexual, non-defamatory content
Key Takeaway: Consent requirements for AI images vary by legal theory. Sexual AI image statutes require explicit consent. Commercial likeness use requires right of publicity authorization. Non-commercial, non-sexual depictions generally do not require consent unless they are defamatory.
Is It Illegal to Share AI Images of Real People?
Sharing AI images of real people can be more legally risky than creating them, because distribution is often the element that triggers the most serious legal liability. The DEFIANCE Act’s strongest provisions apply to publication and distribution, and many state deepfake laws specifically target the sharing of AI-generated content.
For sexual AI images, sharing is the primary conduct that most statutes criminalize. Virginia Code Section 18.2-386.2 criminalizes the distribution of nonconsensual intimate deepfakes. The TAKE IT DOWN Act creates liability for knowingly publishing nonconsensual intimate imagery including AI-generated content. Creating but not sharing may reduce exposure in some statutory frameworks, though creation with intent to share can still satisfy some statutes’ elements.
For defamatory AI images, publication to at least one third party is a required element of defamation. Sharing the image is what makes defamation legally complete. Keeping a defamatory AI image entirely private, with no sharing to any third party, technically prevents a defamation claim from maturing, though other claims might still apply.
Online platforms that share AI images created by users operate under Section 230 immunity in most cases, which protects them from liability for user-generated content. The TAKE IT DOWN Act created an important exception to this immunity for nonconsensual intimate imagery that platforms fail to remove after notification.
Legal risk by sharing scenario:
- Sharing sexual AI images without consent: Federal criminal liability under TAKE IT DOWN Act; state criminal penalties; DEFIANCE Act civil liability
- Sharing defamatory AI images as real: Defamation publication element satisfied; civil lawsuit exposure
- Sharing labeled satirical AI images: Generally protected; First Amendment applies
- Posting to social media platforms: Platform policies often prohibit AI deepfakes independently of legal requirements
AI Image Harassment Laws
AI image harassment laws represent an emerging but increasingly important category of state legislation that applies specifically when AI-generated images are used to harass, intimidate, or harm targeted individuals. Several states have updated their anti-harassment statutes to explicitly cover AI-generated content.
Traditional harassment and cyberstalking statutes apply to AI images when they are used as tools of targeted harassment. Federal cyberstalking law at 18 U.S.C. Section 2261A covers the use of electronic communications, including AI-generated images, to harass, intimidate, or place another person in reasonable fear of serious bodily injury. The statute carries penalties of up to five years in federal prison.
California Penal Code Section 647.8 (effective 2023) specifically addresses the use of AI-generated content in the context of harassment. Illinois and other states have similarly expanded their harassment statutes to cover AI-generated depictions. Georgia’s SB 337 addressed AI-generated harassment content.
The harassment context frequently intersects with the sexual AI image context: many targeted harassment campaigns against private individuals use sexual AI-generated images specifically because of their emotional and reputational impact on victims. In those cases, sexual deepfake statutes, DEFIANCE Act provisions, and harassment statutes all apply simultaneously.
Federal and state harassment laws applicable to AI images:
- Federal cyberstalking: 18 U.S.C. Section 2261A; up to 5 years
- California harassment via AI: Penal Code Section 647.8
- Stalking statutes (most states): Apply when AI images create fear of harm
- Workplace harassment: Title VII applies when AI images are used in employment context
- Domestic abuse context: AI image use in intimate partner harassment can trigger protective order provisions
Frequently Asked Questions
Is it illegal to make AI images of real people without their consent?
It depends on what the image depicts and how it is used.
Sexual AI images of real people without consent are illegal under the federal DEFIANCE Act and under the laws of at least 20 states as of 2026.
Commercial AI images using someone’s likeness without consent violate right of publicity laws in approximately 35 states.
Non-commercial, clearly labeled satirical or artistic depictions are generally protected by the First Amendment and do not require consent.
What federal law covers nonconsensual AI-generated sexual images?
The DEFIANCE Act of 2024 is the primary federal law covering nonconsensual AI-generated intimate images.
It creates a federal civil cause of action allowing victims to sue for actual damages, up to $150,000 in statutory damages per willful violation, and attorneys’ fees.
The TAKE IT DOWN Act, signed in 2025, creates criminal liability for knowingly publishing nonconsensual intimate imagery and requires platforms to remove such content within 48 hours of notification.
Both laws apply specifically to AI-generated content and were designed to address the growing problem of synthetic intimate imagery.
Can a private person sue someone for making AI images of them?
Yes, a private person can sue for making AI images of them under several legal theories.
Right of publicity claims are available if the image was used commercially without consent.
Defamation claims are available if the image falsely depicted the person in a damaging way and was shared with others.
Sexual AI images create the strongest civil remedy under the DEFIANCE Act, with statutory damages of up to $150,000 per willful violation available to any identifiable victim.
Is making AI images of celebrities legal in the United States?
Making AI images of celebrities is legal in some contexts and illegal in others.
Clearly labeled, non-commercial artistic or satirical AI images of celebrities are generally protected by the First Amendment.
Commercial use of a celebrity’s AI-generated likeness without their consent violates right of publicity laws in most states.
Sexual AI images of celebrities without consent are illegal under the DEFIANCE Act and state deepfake statutes regardless of the celebrity’s public figure status.
What states have specific laws against deepfakes and AI-generated images?
At least 20 states have enacted deepfake or AI image statutes as of 2026.
California, Virginia, Georgia, Texas, Illinois, New York, and Tennessee are among the states with the most comprehensive AI image laws.
California leads with separate statutes covering sexual deepfakes, election deepfakes, and AI likeness rights.
Virginia has one of the oldest state criminal laws specifically targeting nonconsensual intimate deepfakes, classifying repeat offenses as a Class 6 felony.
Closing
The legal framework for AI images of real people is one of the fastest-changing areas of US law right now. The 2024 federal statutes and the wave of state legislation mean that conduct that had limited legal consequences two years ago may carry significant civil and criminal exposure in 2026.
Bookmark this article as a current reference for where the law stands on AI-generated images in 2026. The statutes and state laws in this space will continue to evolve, and staying informed is the most practical protection available.
