A digital likeness needs an approval system, not a one-time yes

A likeness is a living production dependency

Treat a digital likeness as more than an asset file. It carries a person’s identity into new contexts, versions, territories and media placements. A blanket instruction such as ‘make an AI version’ leaves too much unspoken: what it may say, wear, imply, sell, joke about, resemble, be combined with and where it may appear. The creative shortcut is to make the initial approval broad. The responsible production shortcut is to make the requested use legible.

H&M’s July 2025 announcement says its first digital-twin image release was co-created with a dedicated team and accompanied by behind-the-scenes material. It describes the work as an exploration of generative AI in the creative process and names a participating model among the voices in the release. That public record is not a contract template or proof of every internal approval. It is a useful reminder that participant involvement and transparency can be part of the work, not an afterthought.

Source context: H&M Group — H&M continues its exploration of creativity with AI

Turn approval into a versioned request

Before generation, make a one-page use card for each person. It is a working artifact for producer, creative lead and participant; obtain appropriate professional advice for agreements and jurisdiction-specific obligations. The card should show real reference material, intended character or styling, allowed and excluded claims, channels, markets, timing, likely adaptations, whether the result is labeled, and who can approve a new use.

The key is specificity at the moment a person can still make a meaningful choice. ‘Social content’ is not enough if the planned output can be a product endorsement, a paid placement, a political-looking joke, a translated voice or a long-lived training input. If the team cannot explain the intended context plainly, it is not ready to ask for approval.

• Reference and scope: source capture, intended transformation and prohibited edits.
• Meaning: permitted products, claims, scripts, tone, pairings and sensitive exclusions.
• Distribution: channels, paid or owned use, markets, languages, term and planned cutdowns.
• Control: named approval owner, material-change trigger, withdrawal or pause contact and version log.

Build approval into the shot list

Do not wait for a finished campaign to seek a reaction. Put preview gates at the parts that can change meaning: source capture, character design, first convincing output, final script or copy pairing, adapted language versions and the final paid-media crop. Show the use in context, including adjacent copy and platform treatment. A safe still can become an unwanted endorsement when paired with a price claim or a different product.

Our recommended workflow distinguishes ordinary corrections from material changes. Correcting a sleeve or facial artifact is ordinary. Changing the product category, message, audience, voice, territory or commercial role is material and returns to the named approval owner. This is a production rule, not an assumption about what any agreement permits.

Plan the stop before the launch

Every likeness release needs a short removal path: who receives a concern, who pauses paid media, what inventory can be unlisted, how versions are identified and who tells partners. This is not a promise that the internet disappears on command. It is a way to avoid the worse failure of a team discovering it cannot identify or stop its own active files.

A clean closeout records the final approved assets, their versions, the approved placement map and any open owner review. That record lets a future producer ask for a new decision rather than treating last year’s approval as permission for a new creative idea.