60
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2026
60 points (100.0% liked)
No Stupid Questions
49003 readers
714 users here now
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
As a disclaimer: I'm not an expert (or a lawyer) on the subject, but am interested in it and have done quite a bit of hobbiest research.
From my understanding, you can, but have to be able to defend your claim in court. For example, there can't be significant evidence that you were previously looking at the celebrity, and you obviously can't use features specific to the given celebrity. That said, its going to be very easy to prove if you are the lookalike or are working directly with them.
Surprised there isn't a more concrete example from like a case of a lookalike celebrity doing porn by now.
Trouble would be, if you did that, you'd really want to be leaning in to the fact that it actually was or very much resembled x specific celebrity and that's probably when you'd have crossed the line in to unauthorised use of their likeness. If your porn production has nothing to market it as being something people want to watch because the star looks like someone in particular then it's just one of a million other pornos.
It's also be legally dicier since it seems that there's plenty of grey area from the examples people have cited where celebrities successfully litigated against unauthorised use of their likeness and since it's porn they'll be so much more upset about it and courts likely a lot less sympathetic to your defence given just how damaging and upsetting it would be for the litigant. At least of it's using a different actor for a character in a sequel you can still sell people on how much like the character your chosen star is and so even if you chose someone that looked just like the last actor there's the whole aura around the franchise and the love for the character itself that can help you market it as being basically the same person without having to say it is and getting in to trouble.
The actual celebrities are probably smart enough to not want to invoke the Streisand effect.