A face generated from text prompts can still be someone’s identity. A voice can be licensed from one recording while the resulting performance exceeds that licence. And a finished film can be technically excellent yet unusable in the markets that matter.
That is the procurement lesson in SKF’s 2026 campaign featuring an AI recreation of Greta Garbo. SKF announced the work on September 30. Reuters reported on October 2 that the visual likeness was created without archival photographs or footage, using text prompts instead. One authorised early-film recording supplied the voice material, while a human actor helped shape cadence and pacing. SKF said the campaign was developed with Garbo’s family and estate representatives, using tools including Seedream, Seedance, Gemini and Kling.
The interesting question is not which model made the face. It is what the brand actually bought. Once a recognisable person appears to speak, perform or endorse, the deliverable is no longer just a video file. It is a governed identity asset.
“No archive images” answers only one rights question
Brands often collapse two different issues:
- Source rights: which photographs, films, recordings and performances entered the production process;
- Personality or publicity rights: whether the output identifies a real person and appears to make that person perform, speak or endorse.
The SKF example shows why the distinction matters. Avoiding direct use of old photographs may reduce one source-clearance problem, but the output was still intentionally recognisable as Garbo. WIPO’s guidance on rights clearance notes that personality rights can cover image, voice, appearance, likeness and other recognisable aspects of a persona. It also stresses that the legal basis and treatment of these rights—including posthumous rights—vary by jurisdiction.
SKF’s announcement is evidence of what SKF says it did: collaborate with Garbo’s family and Harriet Brown & Company. It is not proof that any brand can reproduce the same structure for any person, market or product. International campaigns still need market-specific review.
The ONCE Two-Lock Rights Stack
ONCE recommends treating every digital-replica brief as a two-lock system. Production starts only when both locks can close.
Lock 1: the right to create
This lock governs how the asset comes into existence:
- Who can authorise the individual or estate?
- Which photographs, recordings, footage or performances may be referenced, trained on or processed?
- Can a supporting actor’s or voice performer’s contribution be converted into a synthetic performance?
- May vendors retain inputs, outputs or identity-related data?
- What must be deleted, destroyed or archived when the engagement ends?
Lock 2: the right to deploy
This lock governs what the asset may do:
- Which scripts, actions, viewpoints and emotional performances are approved?
- Which products, categories and brands may be associated with the person?
- Which markets, languages, media and versions are covered?
- How long may each use run, and what triggers renewal or a new fee?
- Who approves the final performance and owns disclosure, takedown and destruction?
The locks are not interchangeable. Permission to use one recording is not a global endorsement licence. Permission to create a digital model is not permission to generate unlimited scripts, products or future campaigns.
Contract signals: specific consent and a defined exit
The SAG-AFTRA 2025 Commercials Contracts apply to covered union work, not to every production worldwide. They are still a useful contracting benchmark. The union says consent is required before a digital replica is created, informed consent must precede use, and the intended use must be described with reasonable specificity. New commercial performances trigger engagement and fees. If a producer wants to retain the replica after the maximum period of use, further consent is required; without it, the replica must be destroyed.
For procurement teams, the signal is clear: “global, perpetual, all media, all forms” does not create operational simplicity. It concentrates uncertainty. A safer brief treats each identity × scene × market × term combination as a separately approved use.
The EU AI Act addresses another layer. Article 50 requires appropriate disclosure for deepfake content, with a tailored approach for artistic or creative works. Disclosure answers, “Will the audience know this is synthetic?” Rights clearance answers, “Was the brand allowed to make this person appear?” A production needs both.
For a separate operating model covering disclosure and platform routing, see ONCE’s global AI ad disclosure map. This article addresses the upstream identity and delivery decision.
Replace “make an AI celebrity video” with six acceptance layers
An executable brief should contain the following records:
| Layer | Required question | Acceptance evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Identity authority | Who can authorise the person or estate? | Signed chain of authority |
| Source material | Which images, voices and performances may be processed? | Asset register and licence scope |
| Performance scope | What may the person say, do or endorse? | Approved scripts, actions and exclusions |
| Generation history | Which tools, inputs and human performances contributed? | Version log and accountable owner |
| Distribution matrix | Which markets, media, languages and terms apply? | Approved use matrix |
| Exit mechanism | What happens at expiry, revocation or dispute? | Takedown, retention and destruction plan |
This is not paperwork for its own sake. It converts “we discussed it” into a deliverable that legal, marketing, production and local-market teams can inspect. It also allows the production company to price rights management, version control and takedown rather than discovering those costs after creative approval.
Price the cleared use, not only the finished film
Traditional production estimates focus on shoot days, shot count and post-production hours. A digital-replica project needs an additional internal comparison:
Cost per cleared rendition = (identity rights + source clearance + human performance contribution + generation and post + legal/market review + disclosure and version records + retention/takedown) ÷ approved identity × scene × market × term combinations
This is an ONCE procurement model, not an industry benchmark or legal formula. Its purpose is to expose two hidden economics:
- A cheap-to-generate shot may be expensive if it is cleared for only one market or a short term.
- A well-scoped identity asset may be more valuable if multiple approved uses can be produced without reopening consent, review and takedown every time.
The useful budget question is therefore not only “What does the film cost?” It is “What does each rendition cost after it is cleared to launch, archive and retire?”
Four decision exits
Every commissioning meeting should end in one of four places:
- Proceed. The person has a genuine narrative relationship with the brand; authority is clear; the intended performance is specifically approved; maintenance and takedown are funded.
- Narrow. The idea is strong, but market, term, category or script boundaries remain unclear. Produce one controlled use instead of assuming global reuse.
- Recast a living performer. The concept requires judgment, improvisation or ongoing participation. A live collaboration may reduce performance and reputation risk.
- Stop or use a fictional character. The identity is mainly an attention device, the authority chain is incomplete, or the brand cannot support long-term storage, review and withdrawal.
The SKF campaign demonstrates that AI can return a historic figure to the screen. It does not demonstrate that identity can be bought as a one-off visual effect. The scalable capability is a system that joins consent, generation, approval, distribution and exit. Without that system, the synthetic performance is not an asset; it is a liability that begins accumulating after launch.
Sources
- Reuters, “Swedish ball-bearing ad revives Greta Garbo with US, Chinese AI,” October 2, 2026
- SKF, “Greta Garbo is back – starring in SKF’s initiative to overcome friction,” September 30, 2026
- SAG-AFTRA, 2025 Commercials Contracts
- EUR-Lex, Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, Article 50, consolidated July 27, 2026
- WIPO, Rights clearance: A guide for independent filmmakers—Personality rights
This article provides a production and procurement framework, not legal advice for any jurisdiction. International campaigns should be reviewed by qualified counsel in the relevant markets.
