Rhode Island Deepfake Laws: AI Images, Voice Cloning & Penalties (2026)

Rhode Island is one of a growing number of states with dedicated deepfake legislation. As of July 2, 2025, Governor Daniel J. McKee signed two laws the same day: an expansion of the state's nonconsensual intimate-image statute to cover AI-generated content (R.I. Gen. Laws s. 11-64-3, amended by 2025-H 5046), and a new chapter prohibiting deceptive synthetic media in election communications (R.I. Gen. Laws ch. 17-30). Rhode Island has no dedicated AI voice-cloning statute, though its longstanding right-of-publicity laws (R.I. Gen. Laws s. 9-1-28 and s. 9-1-28.1) may reach some commercial misuses of a person's likeness.

Is It Illegal to Make a Deepfake of Someone in Rhode Island?

It depends on what the deepfake depicts and how it is used. Rhode Island now criminalizes two categories outright: nonconsensual sexually explicit deepfakes of adults and deceptive synthetic media used against political candidates near an election. Creating a deepfake that does not fall into either category (a satirical video, an artistic composite, or a commercial advertisement) is not a specific crime under state law, though other laws (defamation, fraud, harassment) may still apply.

The state's child pornography statute (R.I. Gen. Laws s. 11-9-1.3) separately covers AI-generated and computer-generated images of minors, with no gap for synthetic content. Rhode Island does have a statutory right of publicity (R.I. Gen. Laws s. 9-1-28, enacted in 1972) and a privacy statute covering appropriation of name or likeness (s. 9-1-28.1), but neither was written with AI in mind, so non-commercial deepfakes of adults that are neither sexual nor election-related exist in a legal grey area at the state level.

For a broader look at how Rhode Island regulates artificial intelligence generally, see Rhode Island AI Laws, which covers the state's AI governance efforts beyond the deepfake-specific statutes described here.

Sexual and Intimate Deepfakes

Rhode Island's primary tool against deepfake pornography is R.I. Gen. Laws s. 11-64-3, titled "Unauthorized Dissemination of Indecent Material." The statute existed before 2025 as a revenge-porn law, but 2025-H 5046 (signed July 2, 2025 and effective upon passage) added the phrase "including any image created by a digital device or altered by digitization" to the definition of a covered visual image. That addition closes the AI loophole.

To violate the statute, a person must intentionally disseminate, publish, or sell a sexually explicit or intimate-areas image of an identifiable adult (18 or older): the image must have been created or obtained under circumstances where a reasonable person would expect it to remain private, or created without the depicted person's consent; it must be shared without consent; and the person sharing it must act with knowledge or reckless disregard for the likelihood of harm, or with the intent to harass, intimidate, threaten, or coerce.

The focus is on dissemination, not mere creation. Someone who generates a deepfake but never shares it has not violated the statute under its current text. However, anyone who publishes, posts, or sends the image to another person faces criminal exposure.

Penalties Under s. 11-64-3

A first violation is a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in jail and a fine of up to $1,000. A second or subsequent violation escalates to a felony carrying up to three years in prison and a fine of up to $3,000.

The law adds two sextortion provisions. Threatening to disclose a covered image in order to obtain a benefit (money, property, services, silence) is a separate felony carrying up to five years in prison and a $5,000 fine. Demanding payment in exchange for removing an image from public view is an identically penalized felony. Note that convictions under this section do not trigger sex-offender registration requirements.

AI-Generated Child Sexual Abuse Material

Rhode Island's child pornography statute, R.I. Gen. Laws s. 11-9-1.3, covers "a digital image, computer image, or computer-generated image of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct," as well as any depiction "created, adapted, or modified to display an identifiable minor." AI-generated CSAM is covered with no carve-out for synthetic content. Producing, distributing, or reproducing such material carries up to 15 years in prison and a $5,000 fine; possession alone carries up to 5 years and a $5,000 fine.

Federal law adds another layer. The TAKE IT DOWN Act (Public Law 119-12, signed May 19, 2025) is the first federal law specifically criminalizing nonconsensual intimate deepfakes of both adults and minors. It requires platforms to remove flagged content within 48 hours of a victim's notice. For minors, penalties reach up to 3 years in federal prison.

Rhode Island's voyeurism statute also intersects with deepfakes. Our Rhode Island Voyeurism and Hidden Camera Laws page covers the 2025 deepfake update to R.I. Gen. Laws s. 11-64-3 in detail alongside the state's broader privacy-of-person protections.

Election and Political Deepfakes

Rhode Island joined roughly 25 other states in 2025 by enacting a dedicated election-deepfake law. Chapter 17-30 of the General Laws, titled "Deceptive and Fraudulent Synthetic Media in Election Communications," took effect July 2, 2025 under P.L. 2025, chapters 409 and 410.

Section 17-30-1 prohibits candidates, campaign committees, political action committees, party committees, and independent-expenditure makers from distributing synthetic media that they know or should know is deceptive and fraudulent within ninety days of any election at which a candidate for elective office will appear on a ballot. "Deceptive synthetic media" means manipulated images, audio, or video that appears realistic but depicts conduct that did not occur and creates a fundamentally different impression than the original.

The prohibition does not apply if the synthetic media carries a proper disclosure stating it was manipulated or generated by artificial intelligence. For visual media the disclosure text must be easily readable by the average viewer and at least as large as any other text; for video it must display throughout. For audio-only content the disclosure must be read clearly at the start, end, and every two minutes for content exceeding two minutes.

Section 17-30-3 carves out satire and parody entirely. It also exempts two different groups on two different terms, and the distinction matters. Under s. 17-30-3(a)(1), radio and television broadcasting stations, cable and satellite television operators and their affiliates, programmers and producers, and mobile applications and streaming services are exempt outright, with no disclaimer requirement at all; the only condition is that they are not themselves distributing the synthetic media as a political action committee or as an entity making an independent expenditure as defined in s. 17-25-3. Under s. 17-30-3(a)(2), an internet website or a regularly published newspaper, magazine, or other periodical of general circulation (including an electronic publication) is exempt only where it clearly states that the synthetic media does not accurately represent the speech or conduct of the candidate. Section 230 interactive computer services are also excluded.

Election-deepfake laws carry ongoing First Amendment risk. A California law of similar scope was struck down and permanently enjoined in August 2025. Rhode Island's satire exemption and 90-day window are designed to reduce that risk, but legal challenges remain possible.

AI Voice Cloning and Digital Likeness

Rhode Island has not enacted a dedicated AI voice-cloning statute. The state does have a statutory right of publicity: R.I. Gen. Laws s. 9-1-28 prohibits unauthorized commercial use of a person's name, portrait, or picture (with injunctive relief, damages, and treble damages for knowing violations), and s. 9-1-28.1 creates a civil action for appropriation of one's name or likeness. Neither statute mentions voice or AI simulation, and no Rhode Island court has extended them to cover AI-generated voice clones as of mid-2026.

Tennessee's ELVIS Act (Tenn. Code Ann. s. 47-25-1101 et seq., eff. July 1, 2024) remains the national archetype for voice-cloning legislation, creating an explicit statutory right of publicity covering AI simulations of voice. Rhode Island provides no equivalent protection.

At the federal level, the NO FAKES Act (S. 4591 / H.R. 8915, 119th Congress) would create a federal right of publicity for voice and likeness against unauthorized AI digital replicas. It has not passed either chamber and remains proposed legislation only.

FCC declaratory order FCC 24-17 (February 2024) provides some protection against AI voice cloning in the robocall context: AI-generated voices in robocalls are "artificial" under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (47 U.S.C. s. 227), making consent-free AI voice robocalls illegal. This federal rule applies in Rhode Island regardless of the state gap.

Federal Law That Applies in Rhode Island

Several federal laws fill gaps in Rhode Island's state-level framework.

The TAKE IT DOWN Act (Public Law 119-12) is the most significant recent addition. Signed May 19, 2025, it is the first federal law expressly criminalizing nonconsensual intimate visual depictions of adults and minors, with explicit coverage of AI-generated deepfakes ("digital forgeries"). Penalties reach up to 2 years in federal prison (3 years involving minors). Platforms must remove reported content within 48 hours of a victim's notice, with the FTC as the enforcement body.

The DEFIANCE Act (S. 1837 / H.R. 3562, 119th Congress) would create a federal civil cause of action for sexual deepfake victims with liquidated damages of $150,000 (or $250,000 if the conduct involved actual or attempted sexual assault, stalking, or harassment). The 118th-Congress version passed the Senate in July 2024 but died in the House. The 119th-Congress version passed the Senate by unanimous consent on January 13, 2026, and is now pending in the House; it has not been enacted. See our article on the DEFIANCE Act for current status.

Federal CSAM law (18 U.S.C. s. 2256(8)(B), the PROTECT Act 2003) covers a digital, computer, or computer-generated image that is indistinguishable from that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct. That definition is narrower than it first looks: it does not reach drawings, cartoons, sculptures, or paintings, and 18 U.S.C. s. 2252A(c) supplies an affirmative defense that the material was produced using only adults, or was not produced using any actual minor. The narrowing traces directly to Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, 535 U.S. 234 (2002), which struck down an earlier ban on virtual child pornography on First Amendment grounds. This backstops Rhode Island's s. 11-9-1.3.

The FTC Impersonation Rule (16 CFR Part 461, eff. April 1, 2024) prohibits deceptive impersonation of government entities and businesses via AI voice cloning. An individual-impersonation extension remains an unfinalized proposed rule.

What Victims Can Do

Victims of intimate deepfakes in Rhode Island have several avenues. The most direct is filing a criminal complaint with local police or the Rhode Island Attorney General's office, citing R.I. Gen. Laws s. 11-64-3. Because the statute reaches anyone whose conduct or the resulting harm occurs within the state, it applies even if the person who created or shared the image is located elsewhere.

For election deepfakes, the targeted candidate can pursue injunctive relief and civil damages directly under s. 17-30-2 by showing a violation by clear and convincing evidence. Courts may award reasonable attorneys' fees to the prevailing party.

At the federal level, victims can report intimate deepfakes to the TAKE IT DOWN Act's platform-removal mechanism: platforms must remove flagged content within 48 hours of a victim's notice. The FTC enforces compliance. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children operates a tip line (CyberTipline) for CSAM including AI-generated material.

For platform takedowns more broadly, most major platforms have policies against nonconsensual intimate imagery, and some have dedicated reporting tools for deepfake content. Documenting evidence before requesting removal (screenshots, URLs, timestamps) strengthens both criminal complaints and civil claims.

For more context on Rhode Island's privacy and data-protection landscape, see Rhode Island Data Privacy Laws.

Penalties at a Glance

Disclaimer: This page provides general legal information about Rhode Island deepfake laws and is not legal advice. Deepfake and AI law is evolving rapidly; statutes, regulations, and court interpretations can change. If you have a specific legal situation, consult a licensed Rhode Island attorney.

For the full 50-state comparison, see Deepfake and AI Voice Cloning Laws by State.

More Rhode Island Laws

• Rhode Island AI Meeting Recording Laws
• Rhode Island Data Privacy Laws
• Rhode Island Recording Laws
• Rhode Island Sexting Laws