
If you've ever watched an online ad or television commercial and wondered whether that's an actual human being trying to sell you something, a first-of-its-kind New York law aims to make the answer clear. Let's dive into the details of what ad makers need to do under the Synthetic Performer Disclosure Law, and why it matters.
The Synthetic Performer Disclosure Law requires any producer or creator of a commercial advertisement to disclose the use of any AI-generated performer (or "asset") that is:
This law, which can be found at Laws of New York General Business section 396-B, took effect in June 2026.
While the aim is transparency for consumers, the rules do carve out several situations where the disclosure requirements don't apply, including:
Failure to comply with the disclosure requirements can result in a $1,000 fine for a first offense, and $5,000 per incident for any subsequent offense.
The law doesn't give consumers the right to file a lawsuit over an ad producer/creator's failure to disclose required information. It only allows for the imposition of a fine by state agencies.
The ad maker's responsibility is triggered when the advertisement shows up on a screen in New York, whether that's a phone or a laptop or a television. It doesn't matter where the ad maker is located.
So, if you or your business are located in a state other than New York, but you advertise online and someone in New York views your ad, you now have an obligation to disclose your use of an AI-generated performer.
Obviously, that doesn't mean every instance of your ad appearing in New York is going to result in you paying a $1,000 fine. But it does mean ad makers now need to weigh the cost and burden of complying with the New York law against the risk that they'll actually be found in violation of it (and be ordered to pay the penalty).
It's also worth noting that the reach of the law (and its potential burden on non-New York parties) hasn't been tested in court.
No. The law and its disclosure requirements apply only to the maker of the advertisement, not to a company or platform that runs or displays the ad.
So, there's no liability for TV stations, streaming services, cable television providers, or any other entity that merely publishes (and doesn't produce) the ad. (Note: this carveout is similar to "section 230" protection for online platforms where harmful/unlawful content is posted.)
All of the disclosure responsibility—and the financial liability for failing to disclose that a performer is AI-generated, not human—falls squarely on the shoulders of the person or business that "produces or creates" the ad. And that's not the only liability wrinkle in the law.
There are several gray areas that could lead to questions about when and whether disclosure is required (and whether failure to disclose could lead to penalties). One big one: the producer or creator of the ad must have "actual knowledge" that an AI-generated performer (and not a human) is featured in the ad.
So, if a business hires a third party ad agency to create and produce an ad, and the agency doesn't disclose that it used AI to simulate a person, there's a somewhat open question about whether the business can still be cited for failing to comply with the Synthetic Performer Disclosure Law.
The law doesn't specify where the disclosure needs to appear, how prominent it needs to be, whether it needs to display constantly for the duration of the ad, or what exactly is required from format to format (like, say, a 12-second pop-up ad versus a 30-second TV commercial). The statute only requires the ad's producer/creator to "conspicuously disclose" the use of an AI-generated performer.
Since the law just took effect in June 2026, it's a safe bet that the compliance framework—including what's "conspicuous" and what's not—will be hashed out in the coming months and years.
No other state has passed a comparable law creating a legal obligation to disclose the use of AI-generated performers in ads, at least not yet. And that's not to say other states aren't regulating the use of AI-generated content. California has placed some fairly significant disclosure requirements around AI-generated images and content, but these rules mainly place obligations on AI companies themselves, not on advertisers and other third parties who use generative AI to create and distribute material.
The Trump administration has prioritized a federal approach to AI regulation, and seems keen to remove administrative barriers rather than put them up, partly in the name of furthering the country's leadership in technology. One recent executive order touted the need to "sustain and enhance the United States’ global AI dominance through a minimally burdensome national policy framework for AI."
If any state legislation—like New York's Synthetic Performer Disclosure Law—is seen as being in conflict with the federal government's own regulatory efforts and interests, there may be a federal preemption argument to be made, and state laws like this could get struck down. We're not there yet, but stay tuned.