Synthetic Media in Entertainment: A $28B Opportunity or Copyright Nightmare?

Introduction: The Digital Revolution Reshaping Hollywood

The entertainment industry stands at a technological crossroads where artificial intelligence and digital creation tools are fundamentally transforming how content gets made, distributed, and monetized. Synthetic media, encompassing everything from AI-generated voices and digital humans to deepfake actors and automated dubbing, represents one of the fastest-growing segments in the entertainment technology landscape.

The synthetic media market was valued at $4.96 billion in 2024 and is projected to reach $16.84 billion by 2032, growing at a compound annual growth rate of 16.61%, according to SNS Insider. Media and entertainment holds the largest market share at 30%, driven by increasing use of synthetic media in film production, visual effects, and AI-powered dubbing systems. This explosive growth brings both unprecedented opportunities for content creators and complex legal challenges that could reshape the foundations of intellectual property law.

The question facing the industry is not whether synthetic media will transform entertainment, but rather how quickly this transformation will occur and whether legal frameworks can evolve fast enough to protect both creative rights and technological innovation. For independent creators, production studios, and legal professionals alike, understanding this landscape has become essential for navigating the entertainment business in 2025 and beyond.

The Economic Scale: Understanding the $28B Synthetic Media Opportunity

Market Size and Growth Projections

The synthetic media market demonstrates remarkable growth across multiple research analyses. While projections vary, the consensus points to explosive expansion. Grand View Research estimates the global synthetic media market at $5.063 billion in 2024, projected to reach $21.7 billion by 2033 with a CAGR of 18.10%. More aggressive projections from Market.us suggest the market could reach $77 billion by 2034, growing at a CAGR of 25.9%.

North America dominates the synthetic media market with a 39% revenue share as of 2024, driven by substantial technology investments, robust digital infrastructure, and early AI adoption. The United States alone generated $1.36 billion in synthetic media revenue in 2024 and is projected to reach $4.55 billion by 2032.

These projections reflect real market dynamics. ElevenLabs, a leading voice AI company, achieved $90 million in annual recurring revenue as of October 2024, up from $25 million at the start of the year, demonstrating exceptional growth in the AI voice technology sector. The company crossed the unicorn threshold with a valuation over $1 billion after raising $80 million in Series B funding.

Revenue Distribution Across Entertainment Sectors

The entertainment sector’s adoption of synthetic media breaks down across multiple use cases. Generative AI technology captured 46% of the synthetic media market share in 2024, driven by its central role in producing synthetic images, videos, and avatars. Video-based synthetic media led with 35.61% of North America’s market share, while audio-based synthetic media, though smaller, is projected to grow at a 9.84% CAGR through 2030.

Gaming and metaverse applications demonstrate the fastest expansion at 16.34% CAGR through 2030, as studios leverage AI avatars and procedural worlds to shorten development cycles while personalizing player experiences. Traditional film and television production, while still commanding significant market share, is being complemented by emerging applications in virtual production, CGI replacement, and automated content localization.

The Enterprise Adoption Curve

Corporate adoption of synthetic media technologies has accelerated dramatically. According to data from ElevenLabs, 41% of Fortune 500 companies now use their platform, with major media companies like The Washington Post and TIME, gaming studios like Paradox Interactive, and publishing houses like HarperCollins integrating AI voice capabilities into their content workflows.

This enterprise adoption signals a fundamental shift from experimental technology to production-essential infrastructure. The technology no longer represents a novelty but has become core to competitive content creation strategies, particularly for companies serving global audiences requiring multilingual content at scale.

Digital Humans and Deepfake Actors: The New Talent Pool

Technology Capabilities and Current Applications

Digital humans and deepfake actors represent the most visible and controversial application of synthetic media in entertainment. These technologies use advanced computer vision, machine learning models, and rendering engines to create realistic digital representations of human performers, either based on real individuals or entirely synthesized.

The technology has matured significantly from early experiments. Image Engine and similar VFX houses now produce digital characters that can seamlessly integrate with live-action footage, preserving subtle performance nuances like micro-expressions and natural movement patterns. Modern digital humans can be created through multiple approaches: motion capture driven by real actors, AI-generated performances based on trained models, or hybrid systems combining human direction with AI execution.

Peter Cushing’s digital resurrection in Rogue One (2016) demonstrated the feasibility of bringing deceased actors back to screen using motion capture and CGI compositing. Actor Guy Henry performed the role, which was then digitally transformed into Cushing’s likeness. Carrie Fisher’s posthumous appearances in Star Wars films similarly combined unused footage with digital enhancement to complete her character arc.

The controversial casting of James Dean in Finding Jack, announced in 2019, pushed boundaries further by proposing to cast a deceased actor in an entirely new role sixty years after his death. While the project faced significant industry backlash and has not yet materialized, it highlighted both the technical possibilities and ethical concerns surrounding digital resurrection.

Production Economics and Cost Considerations

The economic calculus driving digital human adoption centers on production efficiency and cost control. Traditional film production requires coordinating actor schedules, managing location logistics, and accounting for reshoots and post-production changes. Digital actors offer theoretical advantages: no scheduling conflicts, unlimited takes without fatigue, and the ability to modify performances in post-production without recall costs.

However, current economics are more nuanced. Creating high-quality digital humans remains expensive and time-intensive. Image Engine and similar facilities require extensive data capture, including high-resolution facial scans, voice recordings, and movement libraries. The rendering and compositing process demands significant computational resources and skilled artists to achieve convincing results.

For background performers and crowds, the economics become more favorable. Virtual extras can populate massive scenes without the logistics of coordinating hundreds of people. This application has gained traction in tentpole productions seeking to manage costs while maintaining visual scope.

Quality Benchmarks and Audience Acceptance

The “uncanny valley” remains a persistent challenge for digital human technology. Audiences readily detect subtle imperfections in digital faces, particularly around the eyes and in emotional expressions. Even sophisticated digital recreations often feel slightly “off,” triggering audience discomfort rather than engagement.

Virtual sets and digital environments have reached linear broadcast quality standards, making them increasingly viable for professional production. However, fully digital human performances still struggle to match the authenticity and emotional resonance of skilled live actors, particularly in dialogue-heavy scenes requiring nuanced performance.

This quality gap creates a strategic divide: digital humans excel in specific applications like action sequences, wide shots, and augmenting practical performances, but struggle to carry dramatic scenes requiring emotional depth. Smart productions use digital technology to enhance rather than replace human performance, achieving the best balance of efficiency and quality.

Voice Cloning in Entertainment: Revenue Models and Ethical Boundaries

The Voice Cloning Technology Landscape

Voice cloning technology has advanced to the point where AI systems can replicate human voices from relatively small sample sets. ElevenLabs requires just 30 minutes of audio to create a basic voice clone, though 2-3 hours of recording produces higher quality results. The technology captures not just the acoustic properties of a voice but also speaking patterns, emotional range, and characteristic inflections.

The applications span multiple entertainment sectors. Voice actors can create digital versions of their voices for video games, allowing studios to generate dialogue variations without additional recording sessions. Audiobook narrators can produce content more efficiently, while maintaining consistent vocal quality across lengthy productions. Film and television studios use voice cloning for dubbing and localization, preserving original actor performances while translating content into multiple languages.

Respeecher has specialized in high-end applications, including recreating Darth Vader’s voice for recent Star Wars productions. The company’s technology preserves James Earl Jones’ iconic vocal characteristics while enabling new performances. As of February 2025, Respeecher had raised $2.5 million in funding with a valuation of $8 million, positioning itself in the premium segment of voice replication for major entertainment properties.

Business Models and Monetization Strategies

Voice cloning has spawned multiple revenue models creating new opportunities for voice talent. ElevenLabs’ Voice Library enables voice actors to monetize their vocal likeness through a marketplace model. Voice actors create professional clones and share them in the library, earning royalties based on usage, typically calculated per 1,000 characters generated. This creates passive income streams where voices can earn money 24/7 without active work.

The pricing tiers for accessing voice cloning technology reflect market segmentation. ElevenLabs charges $22 per month for creator plans with professional voice cloning capabilities, scaling to $1,320 per month for enterprise packages including 11 million credits and five workspace seats. Custom enterprise agreements provide volume-based discounts for large-scale operations.

Licensing arrangements with SAG-AFTRA members through companies like Replica Studios and Narrativ establish structured frameworks for ethical voice replication. These agreements ensure informed consent, specify compensation terms, and provide creators with control over how their voice replicas are used. Voice actors can set acceptable use categories, opt out of specific applications, and revoke access if desired.

The subscription-based SaaS model has proven successful. ElevenLabs achieved $90 million in annual recurring revenue by October 2024, demonstrating strong market demand for professional voice synthesis capabilities. The company serves publishing companies like The Washington Post, gaming studios like Paradox Interactive, and numerous individual creators building content at scale.

Compensation Frameworks and Industry Standards

Emerging compensation frameworks attempt to balance technological innovation with fair compensation for voice talent. SAG-AFTRA’s agreements with voice cloning platforms establish baseline protections. The Replica Studios agreement, announced in January 2024, covers both initial digital voice replica creation and ongoing licensing for use in video games and interactive media.

Key provisions in these agreements include transparency requirements around content usage, performer consent for each new project, limitations on how long a replica can be used without additional payment, restrictions on non-disclosure agreements, and data security protections. The agreements also stipulate that compensation follows Interactive Media Agreement standards, ensuring voice actors receive comparable payment whether performing live or licensing their digital replica.

The Sound Recording Code ratified by SAG-AFTRA members in April 2024 established that clear and conspicuous consent, minimum compensation requirements, and specific details of intended use are required before releasing any sound recording using a digital voice replica. Critically, the terms “artist,” “singer,” and “royalty artist” under this agreement only include humans, preventing AI-generated voices from claiming artist status or associated rights.

The Commercials Contracts ratified in May 2025 include what SAG-AFTRA describes as the strongest contractual AI guardrails achieved to date, setting new standards for commercial voice work involving synthetic media. These frameworks provide templates that may influence other sectors of the entertainment industry as voice cloning becomes more prevalent.

Independent Creator Opportunities

Voice cloning technology has democratized certain forms of content creation, enabling independent creators to produce professional-quality audio content without traditional studio infrastructure. Podcasters can maintain consistent voice quality across episodes, audiobook producers can generate content more efficiently, and educational content creators can provide multilingual versions without hiring multiple voice actors.

The Voice Library model creates new entrepreneurial opportunities for voice talent. Voice actors with unique characteristics, regional accents, or specialized tones can monetize these attributes as digital assets. A voice actor with a distinctive Scottish accent, for example, can earn passive income whenever projects require authentic Scottish narration, without being geographically limited to opportunities in their immediate area.

However, market saturation poses challenges. As more voices enter platforms like the ElevenLabs Voice Library, competition for attention and usage intensifies. Success requires not just voice quality but also strategic positioning, understanding of niche markets, and active promotion to drive discovery and usage.

The barrier to entry remains relatively low compared to traditional voice acting careers. While professional voice experience helps talent stand out, it is not mandatory for Voice Library participation. This accessibility enables hobbyists and part-time creators to explore voice monetization without making full-time career commitments, though building significant income typically requires substantial time investment and strategic marketing.

Deceased Performer Rights: Legal Frameworks and Ethical Considerations

The Current Legal Landscape

Posthumous rights for performers exist in a complex patchwork of federal copyright law, state publicity rights statutes, and common law principles. The fundamental challenge is that federal copyright law does not provide a uniform national framework for personality rights, leaving regulation to individual states.

California passed legislation in 1984 establishing postmortem publicity rights for 50 years after an actor’s death, later extended to 70 years at the urging of the Screen Actors Guild. This law emerged in response to a court ruling that Bela Lugosi’s heirs had no power to prevent the use of his image in Dracula merchandise, demonstrating how legal frameworks have historically lagged behind technological and commercial realities.

As of 2024, only twenty-three states recognize postmortem publicity rights, with significant variations in scope, duration, and enforcement mechanisms. Indiana’s “James Dean law” grants expansive personality rights protections regardless of where celebrities were born. Tennessee’s ELVIS Act, signed in March 2024, became the first state legislation specifically protecting musicians from unauthorized voice cloning using AI technologies.

The absence of federal legislation creates jurisdictional complications. A deceased performer’s estate might have strong protections in California but limited recourse if unauthorized use occurs in states without postmortem publicity rights. This patchwork system frustrates estate management and creates opportunities for exploitation through strategic choice of jurisdiction.

Federal Legislative Efforts

The NO FAKES Act (Nurture Originals, Foster Art, and Keep Entertainment Safe) represents the most comprehensive federal legislative effort to address digital replicas and posthumous rights. Introduced in 2024, the act would create a federal right protecting an individual’s voice and visual likeness. This right could be licensed during lifetime but not transferred entirely, and would persist for up to 70 years after death.

The legislation would enable rightsholders to bring civil actions for violations and recover actual damages plus any profits from unauthorized use. Internet service providers would benefit from safe harbor provisions, avoiding liability if they remove or disable unauthorized digital likenesses after receiving notification. Certain First Amendment-protected uses, including bona fide news reporting, would be exempt from liability.

Critically, the NO FAKES Act would not preempt existing state or common law as of January 2025, allowing Tennessee’s ELVIS Act and Illinois’ updated name/image/voice/likeness law to coexist with federal protections. This hybrid approach attempts to provide baseline national protections while respecting state sovereignty and existing legal frameworks.

The Generative AI Copyright Disclosure Act, introduced by Representative Adam Schiff in April 2024, approaches the issue from a different angle by focusing on transparency. The bill would require disclosure of copyrighted works used in training AI models, helping rights holders understand when their work has been used without permission and providing evidence for potential infringement claims.

Estate Management and Licensing Frameworks

Estates of deceased performers now actively manage digital rights as valuable assets. CMG Worldwide represents estates of icons including James Dean, Marilyn Monroe, Burt Reynolds, Christopher Reeve, Bette Davis, and Jack Lemmon. These estates license personality rights for commercial applications, generating ongoing revenue from their clients’ legacies.

The James Dean resurrection project announced for Finding Jack demonstrated how estates can monetize deceased performers’ likenesses for new productions. Dean’s estate, managed by CMG Worldwide, licensed his digital likeness for the Vietnam War film, potentially creating precedent for casting deceased actors in original roles unconnected to their actual filmography.

Estate management requires navigating multiple considerations: protecting legacy and reputation, maximizing revenue opportunities, managing family interests and wishes, addressing public sentiment and fan reactions, and complying with varying legal frameworks across jurisdictions. Sophisticated estates develop detailed licensing frameworks specifying acceptable use categories, approval processes, and compensation structures.

Robin Williams foresaw the digital resurrection trend and included explicit restrictions in his will, barring use of his likeness for 25 years following his death. This proactive approach demonstrates how performers can exercise control over posthumous use by planning ahead and documenting their wishes clearly in legally binding agreements.

Ethical Frameworks and Industry Standards

Beyond legal requirements, ethical considerations shape industry practices around deceased performer rights. Key ethical questions include: Can digital recreations honor a performer’s legacy if used for projects they might have declined? Do audiences deserve to know when performances are posthumously created rather than archival? Should families have veto power over projects using deceased relatives’ likenesses? How do we balance artistic innovation against respect for the deceased?

The entertainment industry has developed informal norms, though these lack legal enforcement. Studios typically seek estate permission before digitally recreating deceased performers, understanding that unauthorized use generates negative publicity and potential legal exposure. Productions often credit deceased actors in ways that acknowledge their participation was posthumous or archival.

Lucasfilm’s approach provides a useful case study. The company obtained permission from Carrie Fisher’s estate for her digital appearances in Star Wars films, maintaining ongoing communication about how her character would be portrayed. The studio worked with Peter Cushing’s estate for his Grand Moff Tarkin appearance in Rogue One. This permission-based approach, while not legally required in all jurisdictions, represents industry best practice for managing sensitive posthumous performances.

Critics argue that financial compensation to estates does not fully address ethical concerns. The deceased performer cannot consent to the specific use, evaluate the script or role, or protect their artistic reputation. Family members serving as estate representatives may have financial incentives that diverge from what the deceased performer would have chosen for their legacy.

SAG-AFTRA Negotiations: Setting Industry Standards

The 2023 Strike and AI Protections

SAG-AFTRA’s 2023 strike against the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers centered significantly on AI protections, with the union positioning the conflict as existential for performer livelihoods. The strike lasted nearly four months, halting production on numerous film releases and television seasons before concluding with a new agreement ratified with 78% member approval in December 2023.

The resulting TV/Theatrical Agreement established comprehensive provisions around digital replicas and AI usage. The agreement defined two main categories: “Employment-Based Digital Replica” (created during employment on a production) and “Independently Created Digital Replica” (created outside the employment context). Both categories require informed consent, fair compensation, and cannot be used to circumvent engagement of background actors.

Key protections include requirements for explicit consent before creating or using digital replicas, detailed disclosure of intended use before seeking consent, compensation structures aligned with traditional performance payment, limitations on multi-project usage without renewed consent, and restrictions on synthetic performers that might replace human actors. When producers want to use “synthetic performers” (digitally-created assets trained on combinations of human actors), they must notify the union and may face bargaining requirements.

Digital alterations to actor performances require performer consent unless changes are “substantially as scripted, performed, and/or recorded.” This provision protects actors from having their performances modified in ways that could damage their reputation or misrepresent their artistic choices.

Ongoing Negotiations and Contract Updates

Following the TV/Theatrical Agreement, SAG-AFTRA has systematically addressed AI protections across its other contracts. The Animation Agreement ratified in March 2024 became the first SAG-AFTRA animation voiceover contract with protections against AI misuse, establishing precedent for voice work in animated productions.

The Sound Recording Code ratified in April 2024 extended AI guardrails to the music industry, requiring clear consent and minimum compensation before using digital voice replicas in sound recordings. The agreement explicitly defines “artist,” “singer,” and “royalty artist” as humans only, preventing AI systems from claiming artist status under the contract.

The Network Television Code Agreement extension in August 2024 incorporated substantial AI protections similar to the TV/Theatrical negotiations, covering live and recorded programs including soap operas, talk shows, variety programs, reality shows, game shows, awards programs, and news and sports programming.

The Interactive Media Agreement ratified in July 2025 includes consent and disclosure requirements for AI digital replica use and, significantly, the ability for performers to suspend consent for generation of new material during a strike. This provision addresses union concerns that digital replicas could be used to undermine strike effectiveness by allowing production to continue without physical performer participation.

The Commercials Contracts ratified in May 2025 achieved what SAG-AFTRA describes as the strongest contractual AI guardrails to date, setting new benchmarks for commercial production involving synthetic media. These agreements demonstrate progressive strengthening of protections as the union develops expertise and leverage in AI negotiations.

Platform-Specific Agreements

Beyond industry-wide collective bargaining, SAG-AFTRA has pursued agreements with specific technology platforms to create ethical frameworks for AI voice usage. The Replica Studios agreement, announced at CES in January 2024, enables SAG-AFTRA members to create and license digital voice replicas for video game development and interactive media under union protections.

The agreement establishes transparency around content creation, requiring disclosure of how voice replicas will be used. Performers provide informed consent for each new project, preventing blanket authorizations that could be exploited for unanticipated purposes. Time limitations prevent indefinite usage without additional payment and consent. Confidentiality agreement restrictions ensure performers are not silenced about problematic uses. Data security protections safeguard the digital voice replicas themselves and underlying training recordings.

The Narrativ agreement announced in August 2024 extends these protections to advertising applications. The platform connects voice actors with advertisers for commercial voice work using digital replicas. SAG-AFTRA members can opt out of specific advertising categories they do not want to promote, maintaining control over their voice’s commercial associations. If performers leave the platform, Narrativ must delete their digital voice replica and all recordings used to create it.

The Ethovox agreement announced in October 2024 involves a company building a fully authenticated foundational AI model for voice incorporating SAG-AFTRA’s AI guardrails. This partnership demonstrates the union’s strategy of proactively working with technology developers to build protections into AI systems at the foundational level rather than solely relying on contractual enforcement after systems are deployed.

Criticisms and Limitations

Not all SAG-AFTRA members support the union’s AI agreements. Some voice actors, particularly those working in video games, express concern that AI agreements legitimize technologies that could ultimately eliminate their jobs. They argue that even ethical AI voice replication represents an existential threat to voice acting as a profession, as studios may prefer licensing existing voice replicas over hiring actors for new performances.

Critics point out that SAG-AFTRA’s agreements cover only union members, leaving non-union performers without protections. A significant portion of entertainment production operates outside union jurisdiction, particularly in emerging platforms, independent productions, and global content creation. Non-union performers may sign contracts granting broader AI usage rights without the bargaining leverage unions provide.

The agreements also face enforcement challenges. Monitoring AI usage at scale requires technical detection capabilities and resources for investigating potential violations. Small-scale or foreign productions may evade union oversight entirely. The rapid evolution of AI technology means contractual language negotiated today may not adequately address capabilities developed tomorrow.

Some entertainment lawyers note ambiguities in the agreements that could create disputes. For example, the allowance for editorial discretion in using digital replicas might permit broader changes than performers expect. The multi-project exception for employment-based digital replicas, while requiring identification of intended use, could enable uses that stretch beyond originally disclosed scope.

Independent Creator Opportunities: Democratization and Competition

Lower Barriers to Entry

Synthetic media technologies have dramatically reduced barriers to content creation. Tools that required expensive studio infrastructure and specialized expertise are now available as affordable cloud-based services accessible to individual creators. This democratization enables hobbyists, part-time creators, and entrepreneurial independents to produce content competing in quality with professional studios.

Voice synthesis eliminates the need for professional recording studios and expensive microphone equipment. Creators can generate narration, character voices, or podcast content using AI voices that sound natural and expressive. ElevenLabs’ free tier provides 10,000 characters per month, sufficient for experimenting and small projects. Paid plans starting at $22 per month unlock professional voice cloning and higher usage limits.

Virtual production tools enable independent filmmakers to create elaborate environments and effects previously requiring major studio budgets. Digital humans and AI-generated backgrounds reduce dependence on location shoots and physical sets. While professional-quality virtual production still requires skill and artistic vision, the technical barriers have dropped substantially.

The creator economy reflects this democratization. The North America Creator Economy Market reached $55.8 billion in 2024 and is projected to grow to $331.4 billion by 2034 at a CAGR of 19.5%. Independent creators, defined as self-employed individuals monetizing digital content, grew from 200,000 full-time equivalent positions in 2020 to 1.5 million in 2024, a 7.5-fold increase reflecting the professionalization of content creation.

Monetization Models for Independent Creators

Independent creators employing synthetic media can pursue multiple revenue streams. Direct audience support through platforms like Patreon, Ko-fi, and Buy Me a Coffee enables creators to build sustainable income from dedicated fans. Subscription models provide predictable recurring revenue, with successful creators building communities paying $5-$50 monthly for exclusive content and access.

Platform monetization includes advertising revenue from YouTube, TikTok, and other video platforms. While algorithmic unpredictability makes ad revenue inconsistent for smaller creators, synthetic media tools help increase production volume and quality, potentially boosting monetization metrics. YouTube’s Partner Program pays based on views and engagement, making efficient content creation financially valuable.

Brand partnerships and sponsorships represent lucrative opportunities for creators with engaged audiences. Companies pay creators to promote products, often compensating based on audience size and engagement rates. Creators using synthetic media can respond quickly to sponsorship opportunities by generating custom content without extensive production overhead.

Digital product sales enable creators to monetize expertise through online courses, e-books, templates, and other downloadable resources. AI-powered content creation tools help creators develop educational materials more efficiently. A creator could use AI voice synthesis to narrate courses, AI writing tools to draft supporting materials, and AI design tools to create professional visuals.

Voice Library marketplaces create passive income opportunities. Voice actors listing their professional clones on platforms like ElevenLabs earn royalties whenever their voices are used, generating revenue even while sleeping or working on other projects. While most voice actors earn modest amounts, those with distinctive voices or strategic positioning in underserved niches can build meaningful passive income streams.

Competitive Challenges

Market saturation poses significant challenges for independent creators. The same tools democratizing content creation flood platforms with content, reducing discoverability and increasing competition for audience attention. Millions of creators publish daily across platforms, with high content volume making it difficult for individual creators to break through noise.

Algorithm-driven visibility often favors established creators with existing audiences or content matching current trends over originality. Smaller creators struggle to gain traction against larger channels benefiting from algorithmic momentum. The Matthew effect (rich get richer) applies to digital platforms, where initial success compounds through increased visibility, creating challenging dynamics for new entrants.

Revenue concentration remains stark. MBO Partners research shows that only 9% of independent creators earn over $100,000 annually. Another 34% earn less than $5,000, and 37% make between $5,000 and $30,000. Put simply, 71% of independent creators earn less than $30,000 annually from creator economy work. While synthetic media tools improve production efficiency, they do not guarantee financial success.

Platform dependence creates vulnerability. Creators building audiences on platforms like TikTok face existential risk from regulatory changes or platform policy shifts. TikTok’s uncertain regulatory future in the United States prompted many creators to diversify to YouTube Shorts, Instagram Reels, and other platforms in 2024-2025 to protect their followings and income streams. Multi-platform presence reduces risk but requires additional effort to maintain.

Skills and Strategic Positioning

Success in the synthetic media-enabled creator economy requires more than technical tool access. Creators need storytelling abilities to craft compelling narratives regardless of production technology. Understanding audience psychology helps creators design content that resonates emotionally and drives engagement. Marketing skills enable creators to promote content effectively and build audiences across platforms.

Strategic positioning matters significantly. Creators succeeding in crowded markets often occupy specific niches where they can become authoritative voices. A creator focusing on “AI-generated science fiction short films exploring climate change” occupies a specific position more defensible than generic science fiction content. Niche positioning reduces direct competition while potentially attracting dedicated audiences willing to support specialized content.

Production efficiency optimization allows creators to produce more content or higher quality content with available resources. Understanding which production elements AI can handle effectively versus where human creativity adds irreplaceable value helps creators allocate time optimally. A creator might use AI for background music, sound effects, and initial draft scripts while focusing human effort on character development, emotional scenes, and strategic creative decisions.

Community building creates sustainable advantages. Creators cultivating authentic relationships with audiences develop loyalty transcending algorithmic visibility. Engaged communities provide direct feedback, financial support, and word-of-mouth marketing. Synthetic media tools support community building by enabling creators to produce more content maintaining regular audience engagement.

Intellectual Property Law Evolution: Adapting to AI-Generated Content

Copyright Office Positions and Guidance

The U.S. Copyright Office has consistently maintained that copyright protection requires human authorship, creating significant implications for AI-generated content. In March 2025, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed this position in Thaler v. Perlmutter, upholding the Copyright Office’s refusal to register a work generated entirely by AI.

The court’s reasoning centered on statutory interpretation and constitutional foundations. The Copyright Act defines authorship in terms that presume human creativity, with legislative history supporting the human-authorship requirement. The court noted the Copyright Office had adopted this requirement before Congress enacted the current Copyright Act, inferring Congress intended to adopt the human-authorship requirement when enacting the law.

The Copyright Office released Part 2 of its Copyright and Artificial Intelligence report in January 2025, addressing copyrightability of AI-generated works. The report concluded that human creative contribution must be substantial, demonstrable, and independently copyrightable for works created with AI assistance to qualify for copyright protection. Mere use of AI does not preclude copyright eligibility, but human contribution must extend beyond basic prompts or trivial modifications.

The Allen v. Perlmutter case, filed in September 2024, presents a closer question regarding AI-assisted works. Challenging the Copyright Office’s denial of copyright registration for the award-winning image Théâtre D’opéra Spatial, the plaintiff compared his use of Midjourney to a film director asking a cameraman to shoot multiple takes. This analogy attempts to characterize AI as a tool under human direction rather than the creative author itself.

Fair Use Doctrine and AI Training

Whether using copyrighted works to train AI models constitutes fair use remains one of the most contentious legal questions in synthetic media. The four-factor fair use analysis (purpose and character of use, nature of copyrighted work, amount used, effect on market) produces complex outcomes when applied to AI training.

Several major lawsuits address this question. The New York Times sued OpenAI and Microsoft in December 2023, alleging the companies unlawfully used copyrighted articles to train AI models. The lawsuit claims AI systems reproduce substantial portions of Times articles, potentially substituting for original content and harming subscription revenue.

Artist Sarah Andersen and others sued Stability AI, Midjourney, and DeviantArt in 2023, alleging these companies trained image generation models on copyrighted artwork without permission. In August 2024, Judge William Orrick allowed copyright infringement and trademark claims to proceed, providing early victory for artists while dealing a blow to AI companies using Stable Diffusion.

Thomson Reuters v. Ross Intelligence established precedent rejecting fair use for AI training in certain contexts. The U.S. District Court for Delaware ruled that Ross Intelligence using copyrighted Westlaw headnotes to train a legal research tool did not qualify for fair use, marking a foundational precedent against AI training under the doctrine.

The Copyright Office’s pre-publication version of Part 3 of its AI report, released in May 2025, concluded that using copyrighted materials for AI model development may constitute prima facie infringement, warned that models themselves could infringe if outputs closely resemble training data, and emphasized that “transformative” arguments are not inherently valid. The report stated “it is not possible to prejudge litigation outcomes” and acknowledged “some uses of copyrighted works for generative AI training will qualify as fair use, and some will not.”

Output Infringement and Substantial Similarity

Even if AI training itself is legal, outputs generated by AI systems may infringe copyrights if they are substantially similar to copyrighted works in the training data. Copyright owners can establish infringement if the AI program both had access to their works and created substantially similar outputs.

Establishing access is straightforward if copyrighted works were included in publicly documented training datasets. Proving substantial similarity requires comparing the AI output to the copyrighted work to determine whether the output copies protected expression rather than merely utilizing underlying ideas or facts.

The Chicago Tribune filed a copyright infringement lawsuit in December 2025 against Perplexity AI, accusing the company of unlawfully scraping millions of copyrighted articles. The lawsuit alleges Perplexity systematically copies and distributes Tribune content to generate direct answers, bypassing paywalls and stealing subscription and advertising revenue. This case tests whether AI search systems that reproduce substantial portions of articles constitute copyright infringement.

A regional court in Munich, Germany ruled in November 2024 that OpenAI violated German copyright laws by training ChatGPT on licensed musical works without permission. The case, brought by GEMA (Germany’s music rights organization), claims OpenAI scraped protected lyrics without authorization. This international precedent may influence U.S. litigation strategies and outcomes.

Legislative Proposals and State Action

Multiple legislative proposals attempt to address AI and copyright issues. The Generative AI Copyright Disclosure Act introduced by Representative Adam Schiff in April 2024 would establish processes requiring disclosure of copyrighted works used in training datasets. This transparency would help rights holders identify unauthorized use and provide evidence for potential infringement claims.

The TRAIN Act (Training Responsibility and Accountability for Improvement of Network-generated Media Act) similarly focuses on transparency, obligating AI developers to disclose training data sources. These proposals reflect consensus that transparency represents a necessary first step even if stakeholders disagree about broader copyright implications.

State legislation has moved faster than federal action in some areas. California Governor Gavin Newsom signed 18 AI-related bills into law on September 29, 2024, addressing various aspects of AI development and deployment. Tennessee’s ELVIS Act and Illinois’ updated name/image/likeness law specifically protect against AI voice cloning, establishing state-level frameworks that may serve as templates for federal legislation.

The patchwork of state and potential federal legislation creates compliance challenges for entertainment companies operating nationally and internationally. A production legal in one jurisdiction might face liability in another, requiring sophisticated legal review and geographic restriction strategies.

International Perspectives

The European Union’s AI Act, published in July 2024 and entering into force in August, establishes a comprehensive regulatory framework for AI technologies including transparency obligations regarding copyrighted works used in training. The risk-based approach categorizes AI systems based on potential risks, imposing corresponding obligations on developers and deployers.

China has taken an aggressive stance on AI regulation, implementing rules requiring algorithm disclosure and government approval for AI services. The Beijing Internet Court granted copyright to an AI-generated image for the first time in February 2024, establishing Chinese precedent recognizing AI outputs as protectable under certain circumstances.

These divergent international approaches create complexity for global entertainment companies. Content legal in the United States may violate EU AI Act provisions or Chinese regulations. International distribution strategies must account for varying legal frameworks, potentially requiring multiple versions of content or geographic restrictions.

Conclusion: Navigating the Synthetic Media Future

The synthetic media revolution in entertainment represents both transformative opportunity and unprecedented legal complexity. The $4.96 billion market in 2024, projected to reach $16.84 billion by 2032, will fundamentally reshape content creation, distribution, and monetization across the entertainment industry.

For production studios, synthetic media offers efficiency gains, cost reduction, and creative capabilities previously impossible. Digital humans enable productions that would be prohibitively expensive with traditional methods. Voice cloning supports rapid localization and dubbing. AI-assisted workflows compress production timelines while maintaining quality.

For performers and creative professionals, synthetic media presents existential questions about the future of their crafts alongside new monetization opportunities. Voice actors can license digital replicas for passive income. Creators can produce professional content without major studio backing. However, these opportunities compete with the risk that AI replication ultimately reduces demand for human performers.

For legal professionals and policymakers, synthetic media demands updated frameworks addressing digital replicas, postmortem rights, fair use in AI training, and authorship of AI-assisted works. Current legislation lags technology, creating uncertainty inhibiting both innovation and rights protection. The next decade will likely see intensive legislative and judicial activity establishing precedents shaping the industry for generations.

The industry must navigate this landscape with attention to both opportunity and responsibility. Ethical AI development requires informed consent, fair compensation, and transparency. Legal compliance demands sophisticated understanding of evolving frameworks across jurisdictions. Business success requires balancing efficiency gains against maintaining authenticity and artistic quality.

The question is not whether synthetic media will transform entertainment, but rather how the industry collectively manages this transformation. Those who understand both the capabilities and limitations of synthetic media, who navigate legal complexities proactively, and who balance technological innovation with ethical considerations will be best positioned to succeed in this new era.

The $28 billion opportunity is real. The copyright nightmare is equally real. Success in this landscape requires treating both dimensions seriously, developing sophisticated strategies that capture opportunity while managing risk. The entertainment industry’s future depends on getting this balance right.

Sources

1. SNS Insider – Synthetic Media Market Report (2024) https://www.snsinsider.com/reports/synthetic-media-market-7898
2. Grand View Research – Synthetic Media Market Analysis (2024) https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/synthetic-media-market-report
3. Mordor Intelligence – North America Synthetic Media Market (2025) https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/north-america-synthetic-media-market
4. Market.us – Synthetic Media Market Report (2025) https://market.us/report/synthetic-media-market/
5. SAG-AFTRA – Artificial Intelligence Bargaining and Policy Work Timeline https://www.sagaftra.org/contracts-industry-resources/member-resources/artificial-intelligence/sag-aftra-ai-bargaining-and
6. SAG-AFTRA – Replica Studios Agreement Announcement https://www.sagaftra.org/sag-aftra-and-replica-studios-introduce-groundbreaking-ai-voice-agreement-ces
7. Davis+Gilbert LLP – SAG-AFTRA vs. AI: Protecting Performers in the Digital Age (2024) https://www.dglaw.com/sag-aftra-vs-ai-protecting-performers-in-the-digital-age/
8. Loeb & Loeb LLP – SAG-AFTRA Signs Agreement for AI Voices https://quicktakes.loeb.com/post/102iyy5/sag-aftra-signs-agreement-for-use-of-ai-voices-in-internal-development-and-video
9. U.S. Copyright Office – Copyright and Artificial Intelligence Initiative https://www.copyright.gov/ai/
10. Congress.gov – Generative Artificial Intelligence and Copyright Law (2025) https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10922
11. Copyright Alliance – Copyright in Congress: 2024 Year in Review https://copyrightalliance.org/copyright-congress-2024/
12. U.S. Copyright Office – NewsNet Issue 1060 (Part 2 AI Report) https://www.copyright.gov/newsnet/2025/1060.html
13. Built In – AI-Generated Content and Copyright Law https://builtin.com/artificial-intelligence/ai-copyright
14. American Bar Association – Generative AI and Copyright Law: Current Trends https://www.americanbar.org/groups/communications_law/publications/communications_lawyer/2025-winter/generative-ai-copyright-law-current-trends/
15. California Law Review – A Right to Be Left Dead (2024) https://www.californialawreview.org/print/left-dead
16. Michigan Law Review – Postmortem Privacy (2024) https://michiganlawreview.org/journal/postmortem-privacy/
17. Popular Science – The Controversial Tech Driving James Dean’s Return (2019) https://www.popsci.com/story/technology/digital-actors-james-dean-resurrection-hollywood/
18. Hollywood Reporter – Indiana Moves to Grant Rights to Dead Celebrities (2012) https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/indiana-dead-celebrities-legal-rights-james-dean-law-288124/
19. Sacra – ElevenLabs Revenue, Valuation & Funding Analysis https://sacra.com/c/elevenlabs/
20. TechCrunch – Voice Cloning Startup ElevenLabs Lands $80M (2024) https://techcrunch.com/2024/01/22/voice-cloning-startup-elevenlabs-lands-80m-achieves-unicorn-status/
21. ElevenLabs – Monetize Your Voice with Voice Library https://elevenlabs.io/blog/monetize-your-voice-with-elevenlabs-voice-library-and-create-passive-income
22. Contrary Research – ElevenLabs Business Breakdown https://research.contrary.com/company/elevenlabs
23. Market.us – North America Creator Economy Market Report (2025) https://market.us/report/north-america-creator-economy-market/
24. MBO Partners – Creator Economy Trends Report 2024 https://www.mbopartners.com/state-of-independence/creator-economy-report/
25. Expert Market Research – New Monetization Strategies for Independent Creators (2025) https://www.expertmarketresearch.com/featured-articles/independent-content-creator-monetization
26. Newstrail – Creator Economy Market to Reach $1181.3 Billion by 2032 https://www.newstrail.com/creator-economy-market/
27. Authors Guild – SAG-AFTRA Agreement Establishes AI Safeguards (2024) https://authorsguild.org/news/sag-aftra-agreement-establishes-important-ai-safeguards/
28. Backstage – SAG-AFTRA’s AI Deal Explained (2024)https://www.backstage.com/magazine/article/sag-aftra-ai-deal-explained-76821/