In a world where artificial intelligence can put words into virtually anyone’s mouth, the question is no longer simply who is speaking, but who has given permission for their voice to be used.
This question has recently returned to the spotlight following Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s filing, on 5 October 2026, of an application to register a sound trademark with the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).
The application, filed under number 019431219, concerns an approximately four-second audio recording in which Meloni repeats the phrase “Io sono Giorgia Meloni” (“I am Giorgia Meloni”). The application covers goods and services falling within Classes 9, 41 and 45 of the Nice Classification, including digital content, publications, cultural activities and the organisation of political meetings.
The move comes against a backdrop of growing concern over so-called deepfakes: artificially generated or manipulated content capable of reproducing an individual’s likeness or voice with striking realism.
At European Union level, Article 50 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (the EU Artificial Intelligence Act or “AI Act”) establishes transparency obligations in relation to certain AI-generated or manipulated content, including deepfakes, which have been applicable since 2 August 2026.
Italy has gone a step further in its domestic criminal legislation. Law No. 132/2025 of 23 September 2025 introduced specific criminal provisions addressing the unauthorised dissemination of content falsified or altered through artificial intelligence.
Although Meloni’s trademark application remains under examination, the approach is not entirely unprecedented. Italian actor and voice artist Luca Ward has already taken the same route to protect his distinctive voice.
Indeed, Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 on the European Union trademark (the “EUTMR”) expressly permits the registration of signs capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one undertaking from those of others, including sounds, provided that the applicable registration requirements are satisfied.
But Isn’t a Person’s Voice Already Protected by Law?
Although Portuguese law does not expressly recognise a standalone right to one’s voice equivalent to the right to one’s image, the unauthorised use of an individual’s voice may, in certain circumstances, constitute an infringement of personality rights under Article 70 of the Portuguese Civil Code.
Copyright and related rights may also provide additional protection where the voice is embodied in legally protected works, recordings or artistic performances.
If the Voice Is Already Legally Protected, Why Seek Additional Protection Under Trademark Law?
One of the principal advantages is commercial.
Registration may provide a legal framework for the commercial exploitation and licensing of a distinctive sound, particularly in advertising, entertainment and digital media.
Another significant advantage lies in the potential to make the existence and enforcement of rights more readily demonstrable and, in certain circumstances, more effective. This may be particularly relevant for individuals whose voice constitutes an essential professional asset.
In this regard, Article 127 of the EUTMR establishes a presumption of validity of an EU trademark in infringement proceedings.
Consequently, where the relevant requirements for trademark infringement are satisfied, the proprietor may be able to enforce their registered rights without necessarily having to establish a separate infringement of their dignity, reputation or personal identity.
Registration may also strengthen the legal basis for submitting content removal requests, commonly referred to as takedown notices, to social media networks and digital platforms such as YouTube.
However, registration of a sound trademark does not confer an unrestricted monopoly over a person’s voice, nor does it automatically prohibit every reproduction or imitation of that voice.
Under Article 9 of the EUTMR, trademark infringement generally requires the use of a relevant sign in the course of trade, in circumstances falling within the scope of the exclusive rights conferred by registration.
Depending on the circumstances, infringement may arise where an identical sign is used in relation to identical goods or services; where the similarity between the signs and the goods or services gives rise to a likelihood of confusion; or, in the case of a trademark with a reputation, where the use of the sign takes unfair advantage of, or is detrimental to, the distinctive character or repute of the registered mark.
But what if artificial intelligence were used to make Meloni appear to say something entirely different from the phrase covered by the registration?
The answer is unlikely to be straightforward.
Trademark protection would not necessarily extend automatically to such use. An assessment would be required of the similarity between the signs and whether the other legal conditions for infringement had been met.
In other words, without prejudice to the separate protection afforded by personality rights, not every imitation of a person’s voice will necessarily amount to trademark infringement.
That is, after all, a matter of both established legal principles and, perhaps, a little common sense — not to mention a sense of humour.
Equally, should the EUIPO approve Meloni’s application, this would not mean that she alone would be entitled to utter the words “Io sono Giorgia Meloni”.
Rather, the exclusive rights would, in principle, attach to the registered sound sign, within the limits of its distinctive function and the protection afforded under applicable trademark law, rather than extending to every conceivable use of the words themselves.
And if Meloni succeeds, could Cristiano Ronaldo be next to register his iconic “Siuuu”?
How VCA can help
As artificial intelligence makes imitation easier, protecting one’s voice and image matters more to artists, broadcasters, public figures and businesses. VCA closely follows developments in trademark law and AI regulation, and is available to assess, case by case, the best way to protect and manage these rights.
Intellectual Property Department
João Valadas Coriel | António Vieira
