Denmark's culture minister, Zenia Stampe, tabled bill L 49 in the Folketing on October 8, 2026. If parliament passes it, from January 1, 2027 it would be unlawful in Denmark to publish a realistic digital imitation of anyone's appearance, voice or movements without their consent. A second clause protects singers' and other artists' performances from AI copies.
The bill amends the Copyright Act. It puts the burden of proving consent on whoever publishes the imitation, protects people until 50 years after their death, and lets courts order unlawful content removed from the platform it sits on, according to PPC Land's reading of the 36-page Danish text. There are no criminal penalties: enforcement runs through the civil courts.
Why is Denmark doing this twice?
The idea dates to a political agreement of June 26, 2025, the ministry's press release says. As CMU reported, the new bill "formally restarts efforts" after a general election and change of government earlier this year, and Copenhagen lawyer Jakob Plesner Mathiasen wrote that the original bill lapsed with that election. Stampe became culture minister in June, after that change of government, CMU reported.
One of the main goals of the bill is to get the tech giants to take down manipulated content quickly, so that it causes the least possible harm.Zenia Stampe, in a statement quoted by Euronews
In CMU's translation, she added: "now we're stopping digital identity theft and helping artists whose livelihoods are being threatened."
What does L 49 mean for singers?
A new section 73 a covers every person, of any nationality, against realistic fakes of their face, voice or movements. A new section 65 a protects the performance itself: a realistic digital imitation of a performer's rendition, or of an artist's performance, cannot be made public without consent. The notes' own example, per PPC Land: a song recording used to generate a realistic imitation of a singer's performance, released on a streaming service.
The bill's explanatory notes say, in PPC Land's translation, that original artists are finding "more and more tracks that contain digital 1:1 imitations of musicians' vocals" on social media and streaming services, tracks that compete with the real music.
The lines it draws:
- Covers stay legal. The notes say the bill is not aimed at legitimate cover recordings, and look-alike or sound-alike bands playing live fall outside, because nothing is digitally generated.
- Only realistic fakes count. The test is an "obvious risk of confusion" with the real person. Satire and parody are exempt unless they are seriously harmful misinformation.
- The performer right can be licensed collectively; the personal one cannot. A collecting society could set rates for AI use of performances, but nobody can sign away a person's face or voice for them.
- Scope differs. Section 65 a covers performers who are nationals or residents of the European Economic Area. Section 73 a covers everyone.
Consent can be withdrawn at any time for future publication, so a voice-model deal needs a contract that says what happens if the singer changes their mind.
How is this different from the US?
| Law | Status | What it does |
|---|---|---|
| Denmark L 49 | Tabled Oct 8, 2026; target Jan 1, 2027 | Would bar publishing realistic imitations of anyone without consent; publisher must prove consent; civil remedies only |
| Tennessee ELVIS Act | Signed Mar 21, 2024 | Adds "voice" to Tennessee's existing personal rights law, aimed at AI cloning of musicians |
| US NO FAKES Act (S. 4591) | Cleared Senate Judiciary by unanimous voice vote, June 18, 2026 | A new federal IP right over digital replicas of a person's voice and visual likeness |
Tennessee's law is one state's publicity right. NO FAKES, as of its June committee vote, moved to the full Senate, Holland & Knight wrote; we found no report of a floor vote as of mid-October 2026. It would not preempt state laws existing as of January 2, 2025, so ELVIS survives either way. One more reach worth noting: per the notes, section 73 a also applies to non-commercial publication, unlike Denmark's existing marketing rules on commercial use of a person's image.
A US artist chasing a voice clone sues over publicity. In Denmark, the uploader would have to prove they asked.
What happens next?
The Folketing still has to pass L 49 before January 1 can hold. It lands in a year when Sony says it has requested more than 260,000 AI deepfake takedowns, and when Taylor Swift is trying to register her spoken "Hey, it's Taylor Swift" intro as a sound mark in four registries. For the licensing side of the same fight, see our piece on artist consent and voice deals.