{"id":392376,"date":"2026-08-05T10:00:44","date_gmt":"2026-08-05T04:30:44","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=392376"},"modified":"2026-08-05T09:39:20","modified_gmt":"2026-08-05T04:09:20","slug":"ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/08\/05\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\/","title":{"rendered":"From Consent to Control: Fragmented Consent in AI Voice Cloning"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

This article is one of the winning entries from Academic IP Unveil 6.0 organised by Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad.<\/p>\n

Introduction: Rise of AI and voice cloning<\/p>\n

The development of artificial intelligence (AI) has been taking place at a rapid pace nowadays. Machines are capable of exhibiting human behaviour through data analysis obtained from datasets online. Previously restricted to science, AI is revolutionising several industries including the generation of images, text, voice, and machine learning. Nevertheless, such advancements come with their pros and cons.<\/p>\n

One interesting development is the emergence of voice cloning through AI. Such technologies create digital clones of voices using algorithms which analyse speech patterns, accents, and breathing through brief samples of sound clips. Apart from the use of AI voice cloning in the entertainment industry, there are also other uses of AI that would benefit the healthcare sector including voice preservation post-mortem and aiding individuals who have speech disabilities. There are also risks associated with this technology as voice cloning through AI can be used maliciously.<\/p>\n

In a recent development at the Bombay High Court, singer Asha Bhosle’s case regarding AI technology has been ruled upon. The Bombay Court held that using AI technology to copy one’s voice constitutes an invasion of personality rights. The court ruled that this must be stopped and the offenders identified. In light of this, it becomes clear that identity itself has monetary significance in the age of AI. However, the fact remains that if liability arises in situations where consent does not exist, this is not necessarily the issue at hand.<\/p>\n

Rather, can consent even serve any purpose given the frequency with which personal information is being manipulated through AI technology?<\/p>\n

Voice as legal identity and judicial recognition of personality rights and fragmented consent in AI systems<\/p>\n

Voice is one of our most powerful tools of expression. A person’s voice can be considered one of the strongest expressions of oneself. AI has advanced sufficiently to generate human-like voices. Artificial recreation of the voices of both alive and dead famous personalities is increasing. However, this process of generating voices without the consent of the person concerned raises certain questions because the voice is not just an ordinary attribute of a person, but it is an integral part of one’s identity.<\/p>\n

Over time, a number of developments have been made regarding the understanding of voice in the legal and evidential context. The sound spectrograms were initially discovered by Alexander Melville Bell, who developed visual depictions of words and sentences using the idea that people have different speech traits. In earlier times, the Evidence Act, 1872<\/a> only considered voice as a form of oral and documentary evidence. However, after certain amendments were brought about by the Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023<\/a> and Information Technology Act, 2000<\/a>, conversations or statements made through an electromagnetic device became recognised as forms of admissible evidence. This shift from treating voice merely as evidence to recognising its uniqueness and identifiability has laid the foundation for its protection beyond evidentiary purposes, particularly as an element of personal identity. This shift from treating voice merely as evidence to recognising its uniqueness and identifiability has laid the foundation for its protection beyond evidentiary purposes, particularly as an element of personal identity.<\/p>\n

In recent times, Indian Courts have acknowledged voice as an indispensable part of the right of privacy\/personality. In Arijit Singh<\/span> v. Codible Ventures LLP<\/span><\/a>1<\/sup><\/a> and Anil Kapoor<\/span> v. Simply Life India<\/span><\/a>2<\/sup><\/a>, the courts held that the singer’s voice, name, image, and signature singing style were essential aspects of his personality that could not be infringed upon. The voice cloning by AI technology represents an issue lying at the intersection between copyright and personality rights.<\/p>\n

Asha Bhosle<\/span> v. Mayk Inc<\/span><\/a>3<\/sup><\/a> does not analyse the issue of consent within the contours of doctrine; rather, it is assumed as a fact that there was no authorisation given for the use of the plaintiff’s voice. The grant of relief was based more on the personality right theory and moral right under Section 38-B4<\/sup><\/a>, in which AI voice cloning technology constituted unlicensed usage of one’s identity and performance, by focusing on “lack of consent” as the fact basis of infringement, without considering how consent works during recording, training, and generation process of AI voice cloning.<\/p>\n

The Indian Courts from 2024 to 2026 have acted swiftly and boldly, crafting remedies far beyond those provided in any parallel judgments made in other countries: extending the jurisdiction into the metaverse, mandating takedown obligations to global platforms, impleading Ministries in Government, and holding AI voice conversion services liable for the clones produced via their software. The three-tier test for infringement in Arijit Singh case: celebrity status, identifiable feature, commercial benefit. Be it known or lesser known, they are equally exposed to voice appropriation risks. For these artists, the issue is not merely exclusion from remedies but a deeper structural vulnerability in consent itself. Overbroad personality rights may also risk chilling the very concept of consent.<\/p>\n

AI voice cloning conflicts seem to arise due to the lack of consent. Consent is fragmented, excessive, and irrelevant to the technology itself. In the Roadrunner Documentary (2021)5<\/sup><\/a>, AI technology was employed to replicate the voice of the deceased Anthony Bourdain, based on his written texts. This resulted in a conflict over posthumous authorisation. “Heart on My Sleeve”, a case of artificial vocals of famous music stars showed how easy it was to fake someone’s voice without their consent and distribute it widely until it got taken down.<\/p>\n

Legal framework, consent gap, and the need for recalibration<\/p>\n

The statutory law provisions currently exist in reaction to identity-based violations due to AI, as compared to a systematic doctrinal law approach. Sections 66-C<\/a> and 66-D<\/a>, Information Technology Act, 2000<\/a> penalise the acts of identity theft and impersonation based on the traditional concept of cyber-fraud; however, the provisions do not cover the creation of a new synthetic identity using AI technology.<\/p>\n

Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023<\/a> requires voluntary, specific, informed, and revocable consent, and right to erasure. However, this data protection framework rests on the premise that the data can still be isolated and deleted from the dataset, which may not be possible with regard to machine learning models, where data forms part of parameters after training.<\/p>\n

Recent legislative measures such as the amendments in 2026 to incorporate “synthetically generated information” under Rule 2(1)(wa<\/span>) reflect the emergence of a significant trend towards regulation not of content but the processes of its creation. Nevertheless, the problem of doctrine remains unresolved in these legislative measures, which does not consider the process of consent throughout the lifecycle of AI models.<\/p>\n

Such findings highlight a structural “consent gap”, stemming from three connected issues: scope (unpredictable synthetic outcomes); temporality (irreversibility of model training); and autonomy (illusory ability to control for downstream uses). Collectively, the three demonstrate that consent in its traditional legal sense no longer correlates with AI-based identity systems.<\/p>\n

Closing the consent gap requires an approach to the concept of consent that challenges the conventional notion from a legal and ethical perspective. The key is to conceive consent as a dynamic and layered process, acknowledging that consent is limited in a generative AI ecosystem; however, it remains a valid component of human agency. This approach has been supported by many policy-makers around the world, including the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) AI Principles.<\/p>\n

Secondly<\/span>, solely relying on the principle of consent may become unsustainable. Recent works within the field of AI ethics and governance, cited in the European Commission’s proposal for the European Union (EU) AI Act, confirm the failure of consent in contexts of high uncertainty when the scope of uses cannot be predicted.6<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Thirdly<\/span>, there must be a balancing of individual rights against collective interests in technology. The responsible AI guidelines issued by the National Institution for Transforming India (NITI) Aayog underscore the fact that while innovation driven through data is necessary for development, this must be balanced with proportionality, purpose limitations, and fairness.<\/p>\n

Fourthly<\/span>, the consent gap cannot be plugged without stakeholder cooperation. In global governance structures, from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) recommendation on AI ethics, the consensus is that responsibility must be shared between data subjects, developers, platform holders, and regulators.<\/p>\n

Fifthly<\/span>, consent models must change to become flexible rather than static. Academic studies in data protection law have always pointed out that the once-off click-and-consent paradigm is incapable of providing meaningful user control in changing technological contexts.<\/p>\n

Lastly<\/span>, there needs to be a technical dimension to these changes. Research in machine learning, especially in aspects like machine unlearning, data provenance tracking, and model auditing has revealed some possible paths to giving control back to users and this need to be addressed.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n

*3rd year BA LLB, Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad. Author can be reached at: 23010323049@student.slsh.edu.in<\/a>.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

1.<\/a> 2024 SCC OnLine Bom 2445<\/a>.<\/p>\n

2.<\/a> 2023 SCC OnLine Del 6914<\/a>.<\/p>\n

3.<\/a> 2025 SCC OnLine Bom 3485<\/a>.<\/p>\n

4.<\/a> Copyright Act, 1957<\/a>, S. 38-B<\/a>.<\/p>\n

5.<\/a> Roadrunner: A Film About Anthony Bourdain<\/p>\n

6.<\/a> European Commission, Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council Laying Down Harmonised Rules on Artificial Intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act) and Amending Certain Union Legislative Acts, COM (2021) 206 final (21-4-2021).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

by Hari Priya*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":392377,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[42503,1191],"tags":[111519,111521,111516,111518,111520,111517],"class_list":["post-392376","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-legal-analysis","category-op-ed","tag-ai-generated-voice-legal-framework-india","tag-ai-identity-rights-and-voice-cloning","tag-ai-voice-cloning-consent-analysis","tag-ai-voice-cloning-digital-personal-data-protection-act","tag-consent-in-ai-voice-cloning","tag-personality-rights-ai-voice-cloning-india"],"yoast_head":"\nAI Voice Cloning: Rethinking Consent and Personality Rights | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Analysis of fragmented consent in AI voice cloning, personality rights, data protection, and the evolving legal framework in India.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/08\/05\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"From Consent to Control: Fragmented Consent in AI Voice Cloning\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Analysis of fragmented consent in AI voice cloning, personality rights, data protection, and the evolving legal framework in India.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/08\/05\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-08-05T04:30:44+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AI-voice-cloning-consent-analysis.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"From Consent to Control: Fragmented Consent in AI Voice Cloning\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"1 minute\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/05\\\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/05\\\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Editor\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"headline\":\"From Consent to Control: Fragmented Consent in AI Voice Cloning\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-08-05T04:30:44+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/05\\\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":1530,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/05\\\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/AI-voice-cloning-consent-analysis.webp\",\"keywords\":[\"AI generated voice legal framework India\",\"AI identity rights and voice cloning\",\"AI voice cloning consent analysis\",\"AI voice cloning Digital Personal Data Protection Act\",\"consent in AI voice cloning\",\"personality rights AI voice cloning India\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Op Eds\",\"OP. ED.\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/05\\\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/05\\\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/05\\\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\\\/\",\"name\":\"AI Voice Cloning: Rethinking Consent and Personality Rights | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/05\\\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/05\\\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/AI-voice-cloning-consent-analysis.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-08-05T04:30:44+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Analysis of fragmented consent in AI voice cloning, personality rights, data protection, and the evolving legal framework in India.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/05\\\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/05\\\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/05\\\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/AI-voice-cloning-consent-analysis.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/AI-voice-cloning-consent-analysis.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"AI voice cloning consent analysis\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/05\\\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"From Consent to Control: Fragmented Consent in AI Voice Cloning\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/author\\\/editor_4\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"AI Voice Cloning: Rethinking Consent and Personality Rights | SCC Times","description":"Analysis of fragmented consent in AI voice cloning, personality rights, data protection, and the evolving legal framework in India.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/08\/05\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"From Consent to Control: Fragmented Consent in AI Voice Cloning","og_description":"Analysis of fragmented consent in AI voice cloning, personality rights, data protection, and the evolving legal framework in India.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/08\/05\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2026-08-05T04:30:44+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AI-voice-cloning-consent-analysis.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"From Consent to Control: Fragmented Consent in AI Voice Cloning","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"1 minute"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/08\/05\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/08\/05\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\/"},"author":{"name":"Editor","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"headline":"From Consent to Control: Fragmented Consent in AI Voice Cloning","datePublished":"2026-08-05T04:30:44+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/08\/05\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\/"},"wordCount":1530,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/08\/05\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AI-voice-cloning-consent-analysis.webp","keywords":["AI generated voice legal framework India","AI identity rights and voice cloning","AI voice cloning consent analysis","AI voice cloning Digital Personal Data Protection Act","consent in AI voice cloning","personality rights AI voice cloning India"],"articleSection":["Op Eds","OP. ED."],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/08\/05\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/08\/05\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/08\/05\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\/","name":"AI Voice Cloning: Rethinking Consent and Personality Rights | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/08\/05\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/08\/05\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AI-voice-cloning-consent-analysis.webp","datePublished":"2026-08-05T04:30:44+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Analysis of fragmented consent in AI voice cloning, personality rights, data protection, and the evolving legal framework in India.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/08\/05\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/08\/05\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/08\/05\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AI-voice-cloning-consent-analysis.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AI-voice-cloning-consent-analysis.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"AI voice cloning consent analysis"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/08\/05\/ai-voice-cloning-consent-personality-rights-analysis\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"From Consent to Control: Fragmented Consent in AI Voice Cloning"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AI-voice-cloning-consent-analysis.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/392376","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=392376"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/392376\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":392380,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/392376\/revisions\/392380"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/392377"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=392376"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=392376"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=392376"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}