Digital Twins and Deepfakes: Footballers Image Rights in the AI Era

In our earlier article on Matthew McConaughey’s legal strategy, we discussed how trademark law is being used to protect personal identity against unauthorised AI use. That discussion is no longer confined to Hollywood actors. In 2026, protecting image rights against generative AI has become a central theme in international sports law, with direct relevance for footballers, their agents, and the clubs and brands that work with them.

From physical appearance to digital identity

Image rights traditionally cover a person’s name, likeness, voice, signature and persona, used for commercial purposes. (Blackshaw, 2019) Until recently, protecting these rights mainly meant preventing unauthorised use of photographs, video or merchandise. In today’s digital landscape, however, the value of image rights is no longer limited to physical appearances or traditional media: generative AI now makes it possible to replicate voices, faces and movements with striking precision, opening up an entirely new legal front.

This phenomenon is now referred to in legal literature as the emergence of digital twins: digital, AI-generated representations of a real person that can be deployed for commercial purposes without that person necessarily having given consent or received compensation. (Zirpoli, n.d.) Unlike traditional image-rights infringements, which typically involve the use of existing footage, a digital twin involves entirely newly generated content that can nonetheless be convincingly attributed by the public to the real person. (Conrad, 2022)

Why this directly affects footballers

World-class footballers now operate as global commercial brands whose value extends far beyond their sporting performance. (Masters & Rose, 2026) A generated video, audio recording or digital likeness of a well-known player could be used for fake advertisements, unauthorised sponsorship deals, or even disinformation, with potentially significant damage to both the player’s reputation and commercial value. (Goedel & French, 2026) Unlike an actor, whose public image is often confined to specific roles or campaigns, a top footballer’s public image is typically extremely broad and international, which considerably increases the potential scope of harm from an unauthorised digital twin.

The legal question this raises is whether the existing legal framework around image rights is sufficient to protect an individual’s identity against unauthorised digital exploitation. In most jurisdictions, including the Netherlands, this protection has historically been built around physical likeness and traditional media, and is not specifically designed for AI-generated content. (Portretrecht – Visser Schaap & Kreijger, 2026) This creates real legal uncertainty about the exact scope of protection where a digital, AI-generated representation is involved, particularly where the generated content is not identical to existing footage but is nonetheless recognised as such by the public. Some jurisdictions, such as the United States (notably California), have started to introduce more explicit protection for digital likeness and deepfakes, while others, including many European countries, are still adapting their frameworks and may lag behind in addressing these new risks. (California Deepfake Laws: AI Images, Voice Cloning & Penalties (2026), 2026) This means that agents and players must be especially vigilant when dealing with cross-border matters, as rights and remedies regarding digital identity may vary considerably from one country to another. (Prosin, 2026)

The role of the World Cup year in this debate

It is no coincidence that this debate is more prominent in 2026 than ever before: the convergence of the 2026 World Cup and the 2026 Winter Olympics has significantly heightened attention to intellectual property in sport. At a webinar held by the International Bar Association on 22 April 2026, organised to mark World Intellectual Property Day, this exact topic took centre stage: how rights holders and commercial partners should deal with AI-generated representations alongside traditional issues such as licensing, broadcast rights and ambush marketing during a year of major global competitions. (IP and sports in a year of global competitions: legal, strategic and commercial considerations for rightsholders and market participants, 2026)

This convergence of major events not only increases the visibility of the issue, but also the economic incentive for bad actors to misuse the digital likenesses of well-known players, given the temporarily heightened media value of these players during and around the tournaments. (Loh, 2026) For agents and legal advisors, this is an additional reason to treat the protection of digital identity not as a distant future problem, but as a current priority.

Practical recommendations for players and agents

Include explicit provisions in representation agreements and sponsorship contracts that regulate the use of AI-generated representations of the player, rather than relying on general image-rights clauses that may not be designed for digital likenesses. For example, contracts could contain a dedicated clause such as: "The Player’s name, image, likeness, voice and any AI-generated or synthetic representations thereof may not be created, used, distributed, or licensed by any party without the Player’s express prior written consent. Any proposed use of generative AI or synthetic media to reproduce, simulate, or manipulate the Player’s likeness must be specifically approved in writing by the Player or their authorized representative." Providing clear contractual language gives a practical starting point to ensure the player’s digital identity is protected.

Actively monitor for unauthorised use of digital likenesses, particularly on platforms and in markets where enforcement of traditional image rights is more difficult. Consider deploying specialised monitoring tools capable of detecting AI-generated content. Practical tools and services for this purpose include digital content recognition platforms such as Pex, Red Points, and Smart Protection, as well as deepfake detection solutions like Deepware Scanner or Sensity AI. (Goedel & French, 2026) Setting up Google Alerts and social media monitoring tools can also help track emerging misuse. Engaging professional monitoring services or working with companies experienced in online brand and image protection can further strengthen an agent’s ability to take prompt action when unauthorised content appears.

Be aware that legal protection of digital identity can vary significantly between jurisdictions; what constitutes a clear infringement in one jurisdiction may fall into a legal grey area in another, complicating international enforcement.

When negotiating with brands and sponsors, explicitly address how future, as yet unknown uses of AI technology will be handled, to prevent existing contracts from becoming outdated before their term expires.

In addition to civil protection through image rights, consider exploring the possibilities of trademark protection, as described in our earlier analysis of the McConaughey case, to the extent the player’s name or likeness can be registered as such. Registering a footballer's likeness or name as a trademark usually involves submitting an application to the relevant national or EU trademark office, providing evidence that the name, image, or signature is distinctive and closely associated with the individual as a brand. The process typically requires proof of consent from the player, a clear representation of the mark (such as a stylized signature, photograph, or logo), and details of the classes of goods or services for which protection is sought. Once accepted, the registered trademark grants exclusive rights to commercial use in the selected categories, making it a valuable tool for preventing unauthorised AI-generated or digital uses. (Trade Marks - IP Helpdesk - European Commission, 2023)

A comparison with approaches outside sport

It is instructive to look at how entertainment industries outside sport, such as the film industry, are addressing this issue. Actors’ unions have, in recent years, negotiated explicit provisions governing AI use of voice and likeness, particularly following disputes where studios sought to use actors’ voices or likenesses for future productions without renewed consent. (Heidelberger, 2023) This development offers a useful template for the world of sport: contractual provisions that specifically regulate AI use, rather than relying on broader, less precise image-rights clauses, offer considerably more certainty for both the player and the counterparty.

For footballers and their agents, this presents an opportunity to be proactive: by including explicit AI provisions in new contracts now, before a dispute actually arises, a far stronger starting position is created than if protection for an unauthorised digital twin must be claimed only after an incident, on the basis of general provisions never written with this specific problem in mind.

Conclusion

The emergence of digital twins and deepfake technology is fundamentally changing how image rights in sport must be conceived and protected. For footballers, agents, and the brands that work with them, this is no longer a theoretical future scenario but a current practical challenge that calls for strengthened contractual protection and ongoing legal attention. Forefront Legal advises players and agents on protecting image rights in the digital era, including the contractual adjustments needed to adequately address these new risks.

This article is intended as general legal background information and does not constitute legal advice for any specific situation. If you are dealing with a specific scenario related to digital identity, image rights, or contract terms—especially where questions about particular jurisdictions or unique contract provisions arise—we invite agents and players to reach out with their queries. For personalised advice on your own position or contract, please contact Forefront Legal.

References

Blackshaw, I. (2019). Understanding Sports Image Rights. World Intellectual Property Organization. https://www.wipo.int/en/web/ipday/2019/understanding_sports_image_rights

Zirpoli, C. T. (n.d.). Artificial Intelligence Prompts Renewed Consideration of a Federal Right of Publicity. https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB11052

Conrad, M. (2022). Non-Fungible Tokens, Sports, and Intellectual Property Law Issues: A Case Study Applying Copyright, Trademark, and Right of Publicity Law to a Non-Traditional Ownership Vehicle. Journal of Legal Aspects of Sport 321. https://doi.org/10.18060/26091

Masters, D. N. & Rose, S. A. (June 15, 2026). Rise of the Athlete Creator: Legal and Business Implications for the New Era Sports. Sports Business Journal. https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2026/06/15/rise-of-the-athlete-creator-legal-and-business-implications-for-the-new-era-sports/

Goedel, J. M. & French, K. A. (July 6, 2026). NIL Rights in the Age of AI Deepfakes. Dinsmore & Shohl. https://www.dinsmore.com/publications/nil-rights-in-the-age-of-ai-deepfakes/

(2026). Portretrecht – Visser Schaap & Kreijger. Visser Schaap & Kreijger. https://www.ipmc.nl/nl/onderwerpen/portretrecht/

(2026). California Deepfake Laws: AI Images, Voice Cloning & Penalties (2026). Recording Law, Civil Code § 1708.86 (AB 602, effective Jan 1, 2020; expanded by AB 621 effective Jan 1, 2026) and Penal Code § 647(j)(4). https://www.recordinglaw.com/us-laws/deepfake-laws/california-deepfake-laws/

Prosin, O. (2026). Digital Persona as IP Asset: Licensing and Protection. WCR.LEGAL. https://wcr.legal/digital-persona-ip-asset-licensing-protection/

(2026). IP and sports in a year of global competitions: legal, strategic and commercial considerations for rightsholders and market participants. International Bar Association. https://www.ibanet.org/articles?tag=brand+protection

Loh, A. (May 12, 2026). The Sports Law Playbook: 2026 FIFA World Cup and Unauthorized Marketing. Loeb & Loeb LLP. https://www.loeb.com/en/insights/passle/2026/05/the-sports-law-playbook-2026-fifa-world-cup-and-unauthorized-marketing

Goedel, J. M. & French, K. A. (July 6, 2026). NIL Rights in the Age of AI Deepfakes. Dinsmore & Shohl. https://www.dinsmore.com/publications/nil-rights-in-the-age-of-ai-deepfakes/

(2023). Trade Marks - IP Helpdesk - European Commission. European Commission. https://intellectual-property-helpdesk.ec.europa.eu/ip-management-and-resources/trade-marks_en

Heidelberger, B. L. (November 13, 2023). Artificial Intelligence Terms of SAG-AFTRA TV Theatrical Contract. Loeb & Loeb LLP. https://www.loeb.com/en/insights/passle/2023/11/artificial-intelligence-terms-of-sagaftra-tv-theatrical-contract