Voice, Image, Identity: How Matthew McConaughey Uses Trademark Law to Regain Control of His Persona in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

When generative AI transforms personal attributes into legal assets

The rapid development of generative artificial intelligence is profoundly reshaping the traditional legal mechanisms governing the protection of personal identity. The ability of AI systems to reproduce a voice, a face, or a manner of speaking with striking realism raises unprecedented legal questions, particularly regarding the control and monetisation of personal attributes.

It is against this backdrop that the recent legal strategy adopted by American actor Matthew McConaughey deserves close attention. By relying on U.S. federal trademark law to protect certain elements of his personality, the actor has embraced an innovative legal approach that reflects the deep transformation of personality rights in the era of artificial intelligence.

‍

I. An Unprecedented Legal Strategy: Turning Identity into a Trademark Asset

‍

A. Trademark Filings Targeting Elements of Personality

Beginning in late 2023, Matthew McConaughey initiated a series of trademark filings with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) aimed at protecting distinctive elements of his public persona.

These filings notably include:

• the well-known expression “Alright, alright, alright”, registered as a sound mark;
• several short audiovisual sequences, including:
  
  
  • a clip showing the actor standing on a porch,
  • another depicting him seated in front of a Christmas tree;
• specific voice recordings, reproducing his distinctive tone, rhythm, and intonation.

These elements were filed as trademarks in their own right and, for some of them, registration or approval was reportedly granted by the USPTO by the end of 2025.

‍

B. A Deliberate Legal Approach: Personality as a “Source Identifier”

The legal logic behind this strategy lies in a fundamental characteristic of U.S. trademark law: a sign may be protected provided it is capable of identifying the commercial origin of goods or services, regardless of its form.

Under U.S. law, a trademark may therefore consist of:

• a sound,
• a visual sequence,
• a short video,
• or any sign perceived by the public as indicating source or sponsorship.

By registering elements of his persona as trademarks, Matthew McConaughey effectively transforms aspects of his identity into legally protected commercial identifiers. His voice, expressions and visual signatures become enforceable intellectual property assets, capable of being licensed, monitored and defended.

‍

II. A Direct Response to the Risks Created by Generative AI

‍

A. The Industrialisation of Identity Misappropriation

Generative AI tools now make it possible to:

• clone a voice using only a few seconds of audio;
• generate hyper-realistic videos;
• simulate public appearances or endorsements without human involvement.

These technologies create an unprecedented risk: the mass production of content falsely suggesting the participation, endorsement or approval of a public figure.

Traditional personality rights were never designed to address the scale, speed and automation of such practices, particularly when content circulates globally and instantaneously.

‍

B. The Central Role of “False Endorsement” under U.S. Law

McConaughey’s legal strategy relies heavily on the concept of false endorsement, enshrined in Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act.

This provision allows legal action against any use likely to cause confusion as to:

• the source of a product or service,
• sponsorship or endorsement,
• or the existence of authorisation by a public figure.

In the context of AI-generated content, this mechanism is particularly powerful: it does not require proof of literal copying, but rather focuses on whether the public is misled into believing that a personality has endorsed or approved the content.

This makes trademark law a highly effective tool against deepfakes and synthetic media used for commercial purposes.

‍

III. The Perspective of French Law: Article 9 of the Civil Code and Personality Rights

‍

A. Traditional Protection Under French Law

From a French legal standpoint, such an approach may appear unusual.

French law traditionally protects personality rights through Article 9 of the Civil Code, which enshrines the right to respect for private life and, through well-established case law, protects the key attributes of personality, including:

• image,
• voice,
• name,
• likeness and identity.

French courts have long recognised that:

• a voice constitutes a protected personal attribute;
• unauthorised use may give rise to civil liability;
• protection applies even in the absence of commercial exploitation.

However, this framework remains fundamentally reactive in nature: it provides remedies once an infringement has occurred, rather than a system of prior appropriation or structuring of rights.

‍

B. The Limits of Traditional Personality Rights in the AI Era

In the context of generative AI, these traditional mechanisms reveal their limitations:

• difficulty in identifying the author or distributor of infringing content;
• multiplication of uses across platforms and jurisdictions;
• lack of a unified, registrable right comparable to a trademark;
• procedural delays incompatible with the viral nature of digital content.

Unlike U.S. trademark law, French law does not allow the pre-emptive registration of voice or identity as proprietary assets. Protection remains primarily defensive and case-specific.

‍

IV. Technological Solutions as a Complement to Legal Protection

‍

A. The Emergence of Technology-Based Protection Tools

In response to these limitations, technological solutions have emerged to complement traditional legal frameworks.

These tools do not replace legal rights, but rather reinforce them by enabling:

• proof of authorship and anteriority,
• traceability of creations,
• secure timestamping,
• evidentiary preservation.

Such solutions are particularly relevant in environments where legal qualification may vary depending on jurisdiction or legal basis.

‍

B. The Example of BlockchainYourIP

A notable example is the French solution BlockchainYourIP, which provides blockchain-based protection for creative works and innovations.

Its key advantage lies in its legal neutrality:

• it is not dependent on copyright law,
• nor on trademark law,
• nor on personality rights.

Instead, it operates as a technological layer enabling the protection of content regardless of the legal regime ultimately invoked.

This approach is especially well suited to:

• audio and video files,
• voice recordings,
• AI-generated or AI-assisted content,
• personality attributes susceptible to misappropriation.

By securing proof of existence, integrity and timestamping, such tools offer a pragmatic response to the challenges posed by AI-generated impersonation, regardless of the legal framework applied in subsequent litigation.

‍

Conclusion

Matthew McConaughey’s initiative illustrates with particular clarity how artificial intelligence is forcing a rethinking of traditional legal tools used to protect personal identity. By relying on trademark law, he has adopted a forward-looking strategy aimed at anticipating the industrial use of AI and regaining control over the commercial exploitation of his persona.

While such an approach may appear unconventional from a civil law perspective, it reflects a broader evolution: in the age of generative AI, voice, image and identity are increasingly treated as structured legal assets, requiring both legal and technological forms of protection.

This article is written by a French lawyer. Any analysis relating specifically to U.S. law should be reviewed and confirmed by a qualified U.S. attorney.