Synthetic performers, real liability: Advertising compliance in the world of AI
A new US state law may feel like someone else’s problem. But if your brand, agency or AI vendor runs advertising campaigns that reach consumers in New York – or if you are developing global creative practices around synthetic content – this development deserves your attention.
What does the law require?
New York’s Synthetic Performers Act took effect on 9 June 2026. It requires advertisers to “conspicuously disclose” when an advert features a digitally created human that is not a real person. The obligation applies regardless of where the advertiser is based; if the campaign reaches New York consumers, the disclosure requirement applies.
What is - and what is not - a “synthetic performer”?
A synthetic performer is a digitally created asset, generated or modified using generative AI or a software algorithm, that is intended to create the impression of a human performer who is not recognisable as any identifiable real person. In practical terms, this includes AI-generated spokespeople, digital presenters, synthetic models and virtual extras. If the asset is a digital replica of a real person, this issue doesn't apply.
Importantly, the trigger is not all AI use in advertising. It applies only where the ad features a synthetic performer and the advertiser has "actual knowledge" of that fact.
“Conspicuous” disclosure and “actual knowledge”
Several points remain open to interpretation. “Conspicuous” is not defined – there is no prescribed wording, placement, font size or duration. “Actual knowledge” is required rather than constructive knowledge, raising practical questions about how an advertiser establishes what it did, and did not, know in a multi-party creative supply chain. “Performer” and “performance” are also undefined, leaving room for potentially broad interpretation.
Key exclusions
The law excludes audio-only advertisements; AI used solely for language translation of human performer content; promotional materials for expressive works (including films, television, streaming content and games) where the use is consistent with the underlying work; and media platforms that merely distribute the advertisement. It also does not expand or limit Section 230 protections, which grant online platforms limited immunity for third-party content.
Penalties
Civil penalties are $1,000 for a first violation and $5,000 for each subsequent violation, assessed per violation. The fines themselves may appear modest, but the reputational consequences for a brand caught failing to disclose synthetic content could be far more costly.
Why this matters for UK and international brands
Many UK-headquartered brands, agencies and AI vendors create global campaigns that will inevitably reach New York consumers – whether through digital channels, social media, or partnerships with US-based platforms. The law applies to the producer or creator of the advert regardless of domicile: if the content is directed at or accessible in New York and contains a synthetic performer, the disclosure obligation may apply. Global campaigns do not stop at jurisdictional lines.
Nor should UK businesses treat this as an isolated outlier. The EU AI Act takes a broader, horizontal approach to AI transparency – imposing user-facing disclosure obligations and technical watermarking requirements across a wider range of AI-generated content, including deepfakes and synthetic media. New York’s law is narrower and advertising-specific, but both share the same underlying policy focus: that consumers should be told when they are engaging with AI-avatars rather than real people.
The UK’s own position has, to date, been more sector-led and principles-based. Rather than enacting a single comprehensive AI statute equivalent to the EU AI Act, the UK government has relied on existing regulators – including the ASA, Ofcom, the ICO and the FCA – to apply pro-innovation, proportionate AI governance frameworks within their respective remits. For example, the ASA released new guidance in May 2026 to address the question of ‘To disclose or not to disclose’. There is currently no UK version of the “Synthetic Performers Act”. But the direction of travel is clear: disclosure and transparency around AI-generated content in advertising is increasingly a regulatory expectation, and UK businesses that use AI tools within the creation of their marketing campaigns would be well-advised to design workflows and compliance structures to adjust to these developing expectations.
Practical takeaways
For brands, agencies and AI vendors whose campaigns may reach New York consumers, the following measures are a sensible starting point:
- Adopting a holistic approach to disclosure and related obligations across jurisdictions (including the UK, EU and New York), with processes in place to monitor developments and update working practices as requirements and guidance evolve.
- Audit live and pipeline campaigns for digital humans, AI avatars and synthetic extras.
- Build synthetic performer identification into creative review and approval workflows and require active flagging of such synthetic performers by agencies, studios and AI vendors.
- Allocate disclosure responsibility and liability clearly in your contracts.
- Document your review and escalation processes to support your actual-knowledge position.
- Review talent, influencer and production agreements to address AI-generated content and disclosure obligations.
Synthetic performers in advertising are no longer merely a creative choice. They are a compliance issue. The brands that build disclosure, documentation and clear responsibility into their workflows now will be better placed as AI transparency expectations continue to expand globally.
