Guide
Making AI video of a real person
The question people ask is whether the technology is allowed. The question that decides the answer is whether the person agreed. Likeness rights follow the person, not the tool that produced the picture.
The actual rule
Consent is the thing that makes it lawful
Most jurisdictions give a person rights over the use of their own image, under one heading or another — personality rights, publicity rights, image rights, or data protection law treating a face as personal data. None of those rules care how the depiction was produced. A photograph, a painting and a generated video all engage the same question: did the person agree to this use?
So the honest framing is not that AI created a new legal problem. It removed the practical barrier that used to make the old problem rare. Producing a convincing depiction of someone once required a film crew and their cooperation; the cooperation was built into the process. Now it is not, and the consent has to be obtained deliberately instead.
Several jurisdictions have also added offences aimed specifically at synthetic intimate imagery made without consent, with criminal rather than civil consequences. That direction of travel is consistent everywhere it has been legislated.
On this platform
What is required, and what is recorded
You must hold the right to use every likeness you upload. That is not a formality in the terms; it is the condition on which the upload is permitted at all.
For intimate depiction of a real person, informed consent from that person is required, it is recorded against the specific character, and generation of that kind is blocked where it has not been recorded. The consent is revocable, and withdrawing it stops further use immediately.
Those records exist because the obligation outlasts the generation. Age attestations, per-character consent records and moderation decisions are retained after an account closes, for the reason that they are the evidence protecting both the account holder and the person depicted. Full detail is on the compliance page.
If you believe your likeness has been used here without your consent, the report route sits outside the login deliberately, and asks nothing of you before it loads. A person in that position should not have to create an account to ask for something to be removed.
The line that does not move
Minors, and public figures
Any depiction of a minor is refused absolutely, real or synthetic, in every context. Prompts are screened before generation and output is screened after it. No artistic intent, no stated age, and no claim that a depicted person is fictional overrides this, and nothing about it is negotiable.
Public figures are not an exception, they are the clearest case of the rule. A celebrity has not consented, and their fame tends to increase the exposure rather than reduce it, because the commercial value in a recognisable likeness is precisely what publicity rights protect. The satire and commentary exemptions people reach for are narrow, jurisdiction-specific, and a poor foundation for anything you intend to publish.
The workable path, if you want a specific recurring person rather than a different stranger each time, is to build a character that is no one in particular and keep it consistent — which is the problem this whole site is about. A consistent invented person carries none of this risk and is, for almost every purpose, what was actually wanted.
This is a general explanation rather than legal advice, and likeness law varies considerably between countries. Where a project depends on depicting a real person, get the consent in writing and take advice in the jurisdiction that applies to you.
Asked often
Short answers
- Is it legal to make an AI video of a real person?
- It depends entirely on consent and on use, not on the technology. Most jurisdictions give a person rights over their own likeness, so generating a recognisable person without their permission can be unlawful regardless of how convincing the result is. Consent from the person depicted is the thing that makes it lawful.
- Can I generate content of a celebrity or a public figure?
- No. A public figure has not consented, and their fame tends to increase rather than reduce the legal exposure, because commercial value in a likeness is exactly what publicity rights protect. Satire and commentary exemptions are narrow, jurisdiction-specific, and not something to rely on.
- What is never allowed?
- Anything depicting a minor, in any context, with no exception and no argument that overrides it. This is not a policy that bends for artistic intent, stated ages, or claims that a depicted person is fictional.
Keep reading
The rest of the series
- Why AI images look like AI, and what fixes itSix tells that mark a generated image, and which of them a prompt can actually remove.
- Getting the pose and the camera angle you asked forWhy asking for a low angle moves the subject instead of the camera, and how to separate the two.
- The lighting words that actually change the pictureWhy dramatic lighting does nothing and window light from the left does a great deal.
Where this comes from
Unlimited Studio is built around this one problem
Everything above is what the product does: a character is locked from eight reference angles, each generation conditions on whichever angle its prompt implies, a score checks the result against the reference, and a film is shot one frame-chained shot at a time. What it will and will not generate is set out in the content policy.