Famous people have fewer rights against parody than do non-famous people. I'm not in favor of making it illegal, per se, but depending on the limits of the law

Famous people have fewer rights against parody than do non-famous people. I'm not in favor of making it illegal, per se, but depending on the limits of the law might be in favor or requiring licensing (i.e. legal permission) to do so for all but parody (which would necessarily take some effort to be obvious as parody). This article has a good discussion on the lookalike topic of which I'm excerpting some: https://www.publicethics.org/post/the-ethics-of-deepfake-pornography https://www.publicethics.org/post/the-ethics-of-deepfake-por... : Suppose I have an indistinguishable look-alike named ‘Danny’ in the pornography business. Danny’s videos are not deepfakes and do not depict me, but people who watch Danny’s videos mistakenly think they depict me. Consequently, the videos affect me in the ways just mentioned. : I suspect that the most fundamental morally relevant difference between distributing deepfake pornography of me and distributing Danny’s pornography is that the deepfake pornography depicts me while Danny’s pornography, despite appearances, does not. : Now, if you use that picture to make a deepfake, then that deepfake depicts me, because it’s based on an image that depicts me. : Just as it would be wrong for someone to nonconsensually distribute a stick figure illustration of me having sex to students in my classroom, so it’s wrong for someone to nonconsensually distribute deepfake pornography of me on the internet.