Clone Yourself

Technology has been advancing at an unprecedented pace in recent years, with new breakthroughs in things like deepfake technology making us question even the most basic things, things we took for granted, like whether we are who we say we are.

What I find particularly interesting about deepfakes is that they have made us question the extent to which we should be protecting things like image and likeness, factors that we took for granted previously, because we assumed that our image and likeness belonged to us and could not be separated from us.

It is indeed some sort of dystopian nightmare that we are not believed and cannot prove our identity, or that our very being can be used against us ... or stolen from us.

We used to live in a world where it was safe for others to assume we are who we say we are, where our identity is linked to us, where we are known by things like our voice, our style of speaking, our sense of humour or manner of dress. However, now we can be divorced from these things, and they can be co-opted easily to a digital image of us, or attached to another image entirely.

We are entering an era where we are no longer unquestionably tied to the components that make up what we used to think of as identity.

Interestingly, this has come about in a time when personal brand is more important than ever. As such, it may be time for people, especially public personalities, to start protecting their style, voice, and image from the risks posed by these new technologies.

I was shocked by the accuracy of voice replication technology and AI to create music that sounded exactly like a song that could have been made by rapper Jay-Z. It was not just the similarity of the voice that amazed me, but the production style, inflections, and all the other ingredients that go towards comprising a 'style'.

How do you begin to start protecting something as intangible as style?

One idea is to start registering content on the blockchain, which allows for the creation of a permanent and unalterable record of digital transactions. By registering content on the blockchain, individuals can establish a clear record of ownership, which is date and time-stamped and can prevent others from appropriating work without permission. It also allows artists to record their journey as they develop a style.

Imagine, for instance, if each draft or experiment or creative exploration was registered on the blockchain. If that was done, and you later had to defend your style as belonging to you, it would be easier, as you could show the development of a style or method and be able to more easily claim a certain style as your own.

Because it usually takes creatives years to develop a style, and it is only memorable because it has been consistently replicated time and time again or applied in new ways by the artist, registering your work from the first attempt, and as it evolves, allows you to defend the style, and to show, and prove, that you have evolved a distinctive style from years of hard work and application of your efforts.

Another solution, of course, is to accept that there will be appropriation, no matter how hard we try and stop others from using our content and work or style, and adopt a more pragmatic approach that envisions and allows the style or image or voice to be licensed so that at least the creator can derive some benefit.

In a world where we will probably regularly experience live performances by our favourite artists after they have already passed away, licensing styles is one way to ensure the continuation of a legacy, yet also ensure that the proceeds of that legacy go to the family or estate, and not just to content creators that seek to exploit the style to create new material after that artist has passed on.

However, to use the personal brand in this way and to register a style as a form of IP, which can be protected in law, could be difficult. If one wants to protect something like style or image, it needs to be distinctive enough to be able to be identified and described, and it needs to be sufficiently unique.

The challenge of doing this is apparent, even if you think of someone with a very distinctive style, say, for example, Madonna. We all recognise her, and we all know she does have a style, but in some ways, as she has changed the way she expresses it so many times, it's very hard to distil her musical influence in a straightforward way. She has a style. But how would we describe it that gets across her legacy and contribution?

This means that developing a personal brand that is distinguishable from others, and is also describable, is crucial. It may involve creating a distinctive style, persona, or voice that sets one apart from others. This may necessitate exaggerating one's "image" to create a brand that can be protected as intellectual property.

The problem with this, of course, is that style, when done well, is authentic and not forced, and this may force the creation of artificial personas and for creatives to box themselves into a style or image before being ready. Although arguably this has been the case for a while in certain creative industries like music, anyway, there is potential for an artist's image to become even more of a trap if it needs to be exaggerated to be impactful.

As a fashion lover, I am always interested in the way style can be used to bolster a brand. I remember going to a conference last year and being struck by the way the speakers were using distinctive accessories to be noticed. When I asked one man about his neon glasses, he said, 'It's his thing,' and he has a whole bunch of different brightly coloured frames.

In the future, it may be necessary to think about these kinds of things to mark out one's image to create a brand that can be protected as intellectual property. Developing a signature style or persona that is instantly recognisable can help establish a personal brand that is easily protectable. For instance, Anna Wintour's iconic bob and sunglasses have become synonymous with her brand, making her brand perhaps easier to protect.

Preparing for the future of intellectual property rights requires individuals to reflect on what makes them unique. Beyond physical appearance, what else sets them apart from others? Do they have a particular way of speaking or acting? If they are comedians, do they have a specific style of humour? And how would it be defined? Is there a signature joke they can protect? Or a skit? Identifying these unique attributes can help establish a personal brand.

I have focused on the threat to persona by the rise of AI and deepfakes, but there are also opportunities - these new technologies can also facilitate the creation of unique and compelling personal brands. For instance, AI can be used to generate unique and creative content that reflects an individual's personal style or brand. It can help refine a personal brand. It can also help with its creation through personalised videos, music, or graphics that are tailored to an individual's brand, style or image.

I don't believe that we can put the genie back in the bottle - we have to think around these issues and take advantage of the opportunity to use technology to magnify personal brand - not shrink it. To help distribute it more easily across different media and see it as a marketable commercial asset.

The bright side of this is that we are now living in a time many of us overstretched business owners and creatives dreamed of (and secretly prayed for) - a time when we can be in two places at the same time. We can now clone ourselves and achieve that.