Home About MLI Firm Rankings Enhance Your Profile e-Zine Methodology

Guide to the Global Leaders in Media Law Practice

REGIONS WE COVER

Middle East and North Africa

North America

Asia-Pacific

Western Europe

Central and Eastern Europe

Rapid technological development

Generative AI can be used to create photorealistic "deepfakes" that do not reveal that they are not "real" images of people, but computer-generated images. However, technological advancements have gone even further. AI video generators (such as Open AI Sora, Kling, Google Veo, Runway, Luma Ray2, Minimax, Meta Movie Gen, Genmo Mochi and others) can also be used to create moving images, commercials and films without the need for conventional film shoots or actors. Voice generators can imitate human voices in a deceptively realistic way.

The rapid pace of technological development is opening up far-reaching new possibilities for film production. Generative AI can be used to rework and alter film scenes, such as making an actor older or younger. By a digital capture of an actor's movements, it is possible to create a digital replica, also known as a "digital clone," which can perfectly reproduce the actor’s movements. AI can also replace or modify a voice. A prime example of this is in the 2025 Oscar-winning film "The Brutalist", where the Hungarian accent of star Adrien Brody was “refined” using generative AI.

Filmmakers' concerns about the use of AI

Despite its potential, the far-reaching technical possibilities of generative AI also give rise to fears. Actors and other filmmakers are concerned that their performances could be replaced in whole or in part by AI, for example by digital replicas of the actors or even by artificial actors ("avatars") that are not "replicas" of real existing actors, but entirely digital creations. This is not some distant dystopia, but a real possibility. Examples of avatars in social media, which have significant number of follower and are promoted by advertising agencies in a similar way to human social media stars demonstrate this.

The use of AI systems was therefore also a key point of contention during the historic double strike by actors and screenwriters in the US. This strike brought the US film industry to a standstill for several months until the end of 2023. The strike was only resolved when the US studios reached an agreement with the US actors' union Screen Actors Guild (SAG-AFTRA) and the writers' union Writers Guild of America (WGA).

Legal limits on the use of AI for actors under German law

German law already provides protection against the unauthorised digital replication of individuals, including actors, irrespective of the provisions of collective agreements.

If a specific person remains identifiable in AI-generated content, personal rights, in particular the right to one's own image, are infringed. Consent is therefore generally required for such use (Section 22 KUG). The right to one's own voice is protected by the general right of personality. Further restrictions on the use of AI may also arise from copyright law or data protection law.

If consent is given for the use of AI, the law does not automatically provide for any entitlement to remuneration. Separate remuneration would therefore always have to be negotiated in individual contracts in return for consent.

Opposing negotiating positions

The early stages of collective bargaining in Germany were marked by very opposing positions due to the far-reaching technical possibilities. The actors' unions BFFS and ver.di were clear in their demand for a complete ban on AI or at least a moratorium to protect their members from its use. The “Produktionsallianz”, which represents film producers, was equally clear about the need for regulations that would allow the lawful use of generative AI. This would ensure film producers’ international competitiveness through the use of current technological capabilities.

Agreement on a collective agreement

Despite these initially conflicting positions, the parties to the collective agreement in the German film industry have succeeded in becoming the first industry in Europe to regulate the use of generative AI in a collective agreement.

The employment relationships of actors are already governed by the Actors’ Collective Agreement and the "Collective Agreement for Film and Television Professionals Employed on a Production Basis" (TV FFS). The TV FFS is widely applied in the film industry, which means that its provisions have a significant impact on the industry. Although this collective agreement was already concluded on October 12, 2024, no agreement was not initially reached on the use of AI. After further renegotiations, the parties agreed on an annex to the TV FFS on the "Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Film Productions (AI Use Annex), which was published in February 2025.

Provisions of the AI Use Annex

The AI Use Annex came into force on March 1, 2025. It applies only to acting performances and not to behind-the-camera employees. It regulates the use of generative AI. The AI Use Annex explicitly states that conventional (AI) technology applications such as CGI and VFX are not covered by the regulation.

It sets out the conditions for the use of modifications or replicas of actors created by generative AI. It only covers the use of the output of generative AI and does not include any provisions on training of AI.

Use of AI with and without consent

The new regulation establishes the principle that the use of digital modifications and digital replicas (digital doubles) requires the consent of the actor concerned. Typically, this consent can be included in the actor's contract. This provision is consistent with the existing legal framework.

Regulations allowing the use of generative AI without consent are noteworthy. The usual post-production adjustments can be made without the actors’ consent. AI modifications in the context of post-synchronization (dubbing) and dubbing into another language also do not require consent. This makes it possible, for example, to dub into another language in the (AI-generated) voice of the respective actor, without the need to involve dubbing actors. Furthermore, changes to the performance, such as appearance and voice, are possible if they follow the meaning or role of the script. As this leaves room for interpretation in individual cases, the responsible use of AI will be particularly important here in order to avoid disputes over the interpretation of collective bargaining agreements

The use of complete digital doubles (digital replicas) without consent is permitted in the event of the actor’s inability to appear due to illness, as long as the use of the digital replica does not significantly exceed the scope of the actor’s contracted real participation. This avoids a costly interruption of the entire production if the actor is unexpectedly absent due to injury or illness. Another use case for digital (partial) replicas is the use of AI in "dangerous scenes", such as stunt scenes, where the actor's face is mounted on the body of a stunt double using generative AI. In these cases, the actor cannot refuse consent in bad faith.

The new regulation imposes strict requirements on the use of digital replicas in the event of further use in other productions (e.g. sequels). A separate written agreement with the actor is required, clearly specifying the intended further use of the digital replica and setting out a separate fee for the actor. Consent in the actor's contract is not sufficient. A personal commitment by the actor to the subsequent production is usually required.

Remuneration for "fictitious shooting days" when using digital replicas

Another key provision of the AI Use Annex is the introduction of additional remuneration for actors when digital replicas or partial digital embodiments of the actors are used. In these cases, the actor is generally entitled to remuneration for the use of the digital replica, even if this does not involve the actor's presence on set or other filming time. The remuneration is calculated on the basis of "fictitious shooting days" that would have been required for a conventional shoot (without the use of AI), i.e. the number of days the actor would have had to act in front of the camera. The amount of remuneration for a "fictitious shooting day" is not necessarily the same as the payment for a real day of shooting. However, the remuneration for a "fictitious" day of filming should be based on the remuneration for a real day of filming. It is therefore likely that a certain percentage of a standard day’s fee will be agreed. Until industry standard percentages are established, actors' contracts are likely to be intensive heavily negotiated.

Digital changes, such as post-production edits or in the context of dubbing, are handled differently. Actors will not be paid extra for these.

Relevance for other sectors and countries

With its first collective agreement on the use of AI in film production, the German film industry is taking a pioneering role in Europe.

Although the AI Use Annex is limited to acting performances in the German film industry, it can be assumed that other participants in film production will take note of the agreed rules with interest. This means that future collective bargaining negotiations on the use of generative AI in the film industry can be shaped by these regulations. The agreed rules will certainly serve as a guide for the European film industry as a whole and may also attract attention beyond the film industry.

As the AI Use Annex so far only applies to acting performances, the negotiations focused on the actors' personal rights. In contrast, other participants in film production will regularly deal with copyright issues. The issue of "AI training", i.e. the question of whether authors' works may be used to train a generative AI, is likely to be at the centre of attention. The question of whether AI training can be justified under the text and data mining exception in Art. 4 of Directive 2019/790 of 17 April 2019 on copyright and related rights in the digital single market (DSM Directive) - implemented in German law in Section 44b UrhG - is currently the subject of ongoing court proceedings and has therefore not been finally clarified. In addition, a reservation of use by the author is possible, Art. 4 para. 3 DSM Directive. This makes contractual solutions crucial.

Given the legal uncertainties surrounding the use of generative AI, individual contractual negotiations are likely to remain complex. Therefore, collective agreements could be a promising approach. The AI Use Annex is a first example of how this can be achieved.

Dr. Thomas Glückstein is Partner at LAUSEN. He advises film producers, television companies, publishers and rights holders with a focus on copyright law and the legal aspects of the use of artificial intelligence (AI). He is regular lecturer at the University of Television and Film Munich and the Ansbach University of Applied Sciences as well as expert speaker for the Academy of German Media. Doctoral scholarship at the Max-Planck-Institute for Innovation and Competition. Qualified commercial mediator.

Marlene Urek has been with LAUSEN since 2022, after having already supported the firm during her legal clerkship. Her focus is on employment law and Artificial Intelligence. She studied law in Munich and Amsterdam (Netherlands) and completed her legal clerkship in Munich. During this time, she gained valuable experience working with renowned Munich law firms as well as the Max-Planck-Institute for Innovation and Competition.

Biographies

Top

The European film industry has set a new benchmark with the introduction of the first collective agreement regulation on the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in film production. This landmark agreement, which comes into force on 1 March 2025, is the result of months of direct negotiations between film producers and film unions. The implications of this agreement for the future use of generative AI in film production are far-reaching.

Dr Thomas Glückstein

Marlene Urek