5 ms·

Implicit in this law is the absurd assumption that an individual owns a particular arrangement of facial features. How does this law apply if an identical twin

Implicit in this law is the absurd assumption that an individual owns a particular arrangement of facial features. How does this law apply if an identical twin or real-life doppelgängers agree to become models for a digital replica? If you throw a quarter in a crowded New York subway, it's likely to bounce off three blond heads that bear a resemblance to Taylor Swift. They shouldn't be denied their own bodily autonomy on the basis of a legal fiction and an ersatz patent system devised for the benefit of a special interest.

tw04 2y ago
If they’re applying for a random acting job they’re fine. If they’re applying for a Taylor Swift impersonator role, they’re likely to run into legal issues. I don’t see why that’s a problem. Why does their bodily autonomy have to include attempting to fool other people into thinking they’re someone they aren’t? If I attempt to convince the government I’m someone I’m not, there are real criminal penalties - my “body autonomy” doesn’t extend to deception.
- philwelch 2y ago
  There are, in fact, Taylor Swift impersonators, just like there are Elvis impersonators. It’s perfectly legal. You can hire them for private events and stuff.
  - consteval 2y ago
    It's legal if you say they're impersonators. What I can't do is hire them for my commercial, make it seem like they're just Taylor Shift, and air that. That's illegal and always has been.
- bitshiftfaced 2y ago
  What happens to biographical movies? Do family estates now have to put their stamp on every appearance of famous people?
consteval 2y ago
> absurd assumption that an individual owns a particular arrangement of facial features They do, in combination with the rest of their abstract characteristics, such as personality. This is commonly referred to as identity - who you are. You own it by virtue of it being impossible for anyone to. You're you and you'll always be you, and nobody else can be you, by definition.

tw04 2y ago

If they’re applying for a random acting job they’re fine. If they’re applying for a Taylor Swift impersonator role, they’re likely to run into legal issues. I don’t see why that’s a problem. Why does their bodily autonomy have to include attempting to fool other people into thinking they’re someone they aren’t? If I attempt to convince the government I’m someone I’m not, there are real criminal penalties - my “body autonomy” doesn’t extend to deception.

philwelch 2y ago
There are, in fact, Taylor Swift impersonators, just like there are Elvis impersonators. It’s perfectly legal. You can hire them for private events and stuff.
- consteval 2y ago
  It's legal if you say they're impersonators. What I can't do is hire them for my commercial, make it seem like they're just Taylor Shift, and air that. That's illegal and always has been.
bitshiftfaced 2y ago
What happens to biographical movies? Do family estates now have to put their stamp on every appearance of famous people?

consteval 2y ago

> absurd assumption that an individual owns a particular arrangement of facial features They do, in combination with the rest of their abstract characteristics, such as personality. This is commonly referred to as identity - who you are. You own it by virtue of it being impossible for anyone to. You're you and you'll always be you, and nobody else can be you, by definition.