William Saunders

Head of Partnerships @hyperknownai
Likeness licensing for creative production
Cast real people, enhance your generative media

[William Saunders @wasaunders]

I recently spoke with the @guardian about why someday we will all be licensing our likeness.

As AI content featuring real people becomes easier to produce, the question shifts from “was this made with AI?” to “did this person authorise their appearance?”

https://t.co/bYzuaKwoNN

[William Saunders @wasaunders]

@willbakerships Where are you licensing your likeness though?

[TVP @Theveripost]

Denmark proposes a groundbreaking copyright law that would grant citizens ownership of their face, voice,and body to fight against Al deepfakes.

[William Saunders @wasaunders]

It's happening 👀

[Ogilvy @Ogilvy]

We are witnessing the ‘NIL moment’ between advertising and entertainment. Celebrities want to scale their endorsement opportunities, but they need absolute certainty their likeness is protected. That's exactly what ECHO delivers. Built by Ogilvy and Creative Artists Agency, and powered by @WPP Open, this consent-driven AI platform proves that technology can protect artists while setting storytellers free.

See how we are giving celebrity ads a responsible AI makeover via The Hollywood Reporter @THR: https://t.co/1FiApNwhTO

[William Saunders @wasaunders]

Give your brand a local face in every market.

Without a shoot. Without setting foot there.

Real people. Local resonance. Sourced, licensed and cleared for your production workflows.

Begin casting today https://t.co/BtUWAq9SIu

[William Saunders @wasaunders]

@tomfgoodwin and soon we'll spread it across selves in parallel 🤫

[William Saunders @wasaunders]

@sirlifehacker @Meta + go next level and licence real people @Hyperknownai 🤫

[William Saunders @wasaunders]

licence yours/others @Hyperknownai

[Pop Base @PopBase]

Grimes is allowing her likeness to feature in the first AI-generated film to be screened in U.S. theaters.

The sci-fi project, generated by Zack London, is titled ‘GODS DON’T GIVE GIFTS.’

[William Saunders @wasaunders]

@AdrianDittmann the only way art is through

[William Saunders @wasaunders]

150+

real people are now available for your AI and hybrid productions

you keep your same process / we handle consent, clearances, licensing

https://t.co/tIF0kyjcG4

[William Saunders @wasaunders]

@eurie_kim @altadaily @Jennywang Wow. And you can now also choose where you show up @Hyperknownai

[William Saunders @wasaunders]

@MitcheIl 👋🏼

[William Saunders @wasaunders]

@alexutopia next: ‘generated with likeness permissions’

[William Saunders @wasaunders]

@rationalaussie you can cast IRL people in these also at https://t.co/Mq5hxsr1LJ

[William Saunders @wasaunders]

@machina9000 *And actual IRL people, rather than synthetic

[Future Brian @ForwardEditor]

Is editing "the old way" gone forever?

... yeah

[William Saunders @wasaunders]

@monospodcast 🤣

[William Saunders @wasaunders]

✅
“Control should be specific, understandable and enforceable.”

[Phillip Shoemaker @pbsIdentity]

Australian footballer Cristian Volpato has licensed his digital likeness to a California company called Callandor.

The agreement covers his appearance, voice, biometric profiles and performance data.

The company plans to create AI-generated versions of Volpato for advertising, fan experiences and other commercial opportunities.

According to reporting published this weekend by The Guardian, Callandor received exclusive licensing rights to those digital representations.

The arrangement gives the company an opportunity to commercialize his likeness while helping the athlete control which uses receive approval.

Think about what this means.

An athlete can now appear in advertising without attending the filming.

They can speak languages they don't actually speak.

They can participate in promotional campaigns in multiple countries simultaneously.

And they can potentially interact with thousands of fans through an authorized synthetic version of themselves.

That's commercially interesting.

But I think the more important development is the attempt to establish a formal relationship between the person, the technology and the people using it.

Because AI makes creating someone's likeness remarkably easy.

Obtaining their permission is a separate matter.

Consider a company that wants to use a famous athlete in an advertisement.

Traditionally, it negotiates a licensing agreement.

The agreement specifies compensation, duration, permitted uses and restrictions.

The company then produces the advertisement.

With AI, the company may be technically capable of creating the advertisement before approaching the athlete.

That reverses the practical sequence.

The ability to create something arrives before the authority to use it.

And the resulting content may be convincing enough that consumers assume the athlete participated.

Volpato's arrangement attempts to address that problem through licensing.

But there are questions worth examining.

What happens when an athlete wants to withdraw permission?

Does the license cover future AI models?

Can the company sublicense the likeness to other businesses?

Who approves individual campaigns?

Can the athlete prohibit particular industries or political messages?

How are royalties calculated?

And how can someone verify that a particular AI-generated advertisement was actually authorized?

That final question is particularly important.

A licensing agreement between two parties doesn't automatically provide a reliable signal to everyone who encounters the content.

A fraudulent advertiser could still create an unauthorized imitation.

The existence of an official synthetic twin doesn't make every other synthetic representation legitimate.

This is why the industry needs ways to connect individual pieces of generated content to verifiable permissions.

There's also an important distinction between an exclusive commercial license and ownership of someone's identity.

People should understand precisely which rights they're granting and which rights they retain.

The Guardian reports that these licensing businesses are still testing commercial opportunities.

We don't yet know how profitable synthetic endorsements will become.

But the underlying question already matters.

When someone's face and voice can be reproduced by software, who gets to decide how those reproductions are used?

My position is straightforward.

The person represented should have meaningful control over commercial uses of their identity.

That control should be specific, understandable and enforceable.

And when an AI-generated representation is authorized, there should be a practical way to establish that authorization.

[William Saunders @wasaunders]

@AidoronInc @guardian Guys, guys, there’s a character limit 😂

[William Saunders @wasaunders]

I recently spoke with the @guardian about why someday we will all be licensing our likeness.

As AI content featuring real people becomes easier to produce, the question shifts from “was this made with AI?” to “did this person authorise their appearance?”

https://t.co/bYzuaKwoNN