Over the course of more than 40 years, Tom Hanks has developed one of the most reliable public personalities in American entertainment. His familiar voice, everyday face, and reputation for decency have made him the actor that studios turn to when they need viewers to believe in something. It turns out that the reason he is helpful to those attempting to steal money from strangers online is because of this accrued trust. Hanks took to social media in late 2023 to alert his followers of the appearance of an AI-generated facsimile of himself in a dental plan marketing. It has nothing to do with him. It occurred once more in 2024, this time promoting what he called “miracle cures.” The purpose of the fake was to look convincing enough for others to fall for it.
Hanks has done much more than just publish warnings in reaction to these instances. He has been actively discussing how to classify and safeguard what he refers to as his intellectual property—his voice, his face, and his cumulative performances—in a legal system that was not designed to take into consideration what AI can currently do with them alongside guilds and legal firms.
Since deepfake technology became advanced enough to yield commercially convincing results, the entertainment industry has been struggling with the fundamental problem: a person’s likeness can now be replicated and used indefinitely, across contexts they never agreed to, for purposes they never endorsed, by people they will probably never identify. There are substantial financial risks. The legal framework pertaining to those stakes is still being developed.
| Category | Details |
|---|---|
| Person | Tom Hanks |
| Date of Birth | July 9, 1956 |
| Nationality | American |
| Occupation | Actor, Filmmaker |
| Deepfake Incidents | Unauthorized AI ads for dental plan (2023), miracle cures (2024) |
| Key Concern | Perpetual unauthorized use of likeness after death |
| Legal Action | Discussions with guilds and legal firms on IP protection |
| AI Use (Authorized) | De-aged to appear 17 in film Here (2025) |
| Broader Context | 2023 Hollywood writers’ and actors’ strikes over AI |
| Financial Risk | Celebrity deepfakes used in high-quality financial scams |
| Hanks’ Warning | Urged fans not to be “fooled or swindled” by AI-generated content |
| Reference Website |
The “perpetuity” issue is the one that Hanks has expressed the most clearly in interviews, pointing out that AI technology could make him 32 years old from now until, as he put it, kingdom come—allowing performances, commercials, endorsements, and anything else a wealthy bad actor might want to produce to continue after his death without his estate’s approval. It is not a hypothetical frame. The worry that studios might negotiate limited AI rights in existing contracts and then use those rights to create digital performances in perpetuity, replacing living actors and paying estates for nothing, was a contributing factor in the 2023 Hollywood actors’ and writers’ strikes. Some of these issues were addressed in the settlement that put an end to the strikes, but technological advancements have continued to outpace legal language.
Hanks himself has successfully negotiated the boundary between legal and illegitimate usage of AI technology, which is an intriguing intricacy. In 2025, he gave a public explanation of how artificial intelligence was employed on the movie Here to de-age him in real-time, making him appear seventeen years old on screen in a way that conventional prosthetics and makeup couldn’t accomplish with the same convincing effect. Hanks is obviously willing to interact with the authorized version, which is agreed to, contracted for, and used in a particular creative context. The unapproved version, in which he uses his face to sell dental plans to those who have trusted him for decades, is much different. Although the legal frameworks that ought to incorporate this distinction are still being developed, it is important from an ethical and financial standpoint.
The deepfake issue extends beyond the entertainment sector to the financial fraud dimension, where it impacts common people who are unaware of residual payments or guild discussions. A increase in complex schemes that target audiences that recognize a face, hear a familiar voice, and believe that endorsement is real has been directly linked to high-quality celebrity deepfakes. The dental plan advertisement with the impersonation of Tom Hanks was based on the same reasoning that real advertising has long employed: people are more likely to believe someone they know, and a suggestion from a stranger is not as credible as one from someone they have watched for forty years. It is not a novel idea to use that trust as a weapon to sell fake goods. These are the AI techniques that make it inexpensive and compelling.
It’s difficult to ignore the fact that there is a major financial question hidden behind the celebrity rights debate. Who gets paid and how is it determined if a deceased actor’s image can be used endlessly to promote brands, sell goods, and feature in movies? It took decades and numerous legal fights for the music industry to create royalty arrangements for recordings made by deceased artists. For digital performances that don’t need the original artist to be alive, present, or even consulted, the film industry is currently facing the same dilemma. One of the public voices advancing that discussion is Hanks. Estates, studios, customers, and anybody whose face is currently saved in a training dataset someplace will soon care about the response.