Carl Sagan Rights Holder Sues Luma AI Over ‘Cosmos’ Voice Clip in Ad

Druyan-Sagan Associates Inc., the company that controls Carl Sagan’s intellectual property rights, has sued Luma AI, accusing the artificial intelligence startup of using an eight-second audio clip from “Cosmos” without permission in an advertisement for its Ray 3.14 generative video platform.

The company, which is controlled by Sagan’s widow, Ann Druyan, filed the lawsuit Aug. 25 in federal court in Los Angeles. The complaint accuses Luma of copyright infringement, false endorsement and common law unfair competition over the use of the recording in advertising for its AI video technology.

The excerpt features Sagan delivering his well-known observation that making an apple pie from scratch would first require inventing the universe. According to the lawsuit, Luma posted the advertisement on Facebook, Instagram, X and other social media platforms. The Facebook version had received more than 2.7 million views by the time the complaint was filed, Druyan-Sagan Associates claims.

Sagan’s voice and likeness have previously been licensed for commercial projects involving companies including Apple, Fiat Chrysler and Netflix. Druyan-Sagan Associates argues that Luma used the “Cosmos” material without a license and created the false impression that Sagan or those responsible for his intellectual property supported or approved the company’s product.

Copyright law protects original creative works that have been recorded or otherwise fixed in a tangible form. The copyright claim against Luma focuses on the allegedly unauthorized use of material from “Cosmos,” rather than ownership of Sagan’s voice itself. A copyrighted recording and the identity of the person heard in that recording can involve separate legal rights, even when both are used in the same advertisement.

The lawsuit’s false endorsement claim addresses the second issue. Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act can prohibit commercial uses that are likely to confuse consumers about whether a person sponsored, approved or is affiliated with a product. An advertisement does not have to expressly state that someone endorses a product if the way that person’s recognizable identity is used could create that impression.

Druyan-Sagan Associates says it sent Luma a cease and desist letter in February. According to the complaint, Luma responded that the use of the excerpt was “de minimis” and would not confuse consumers.

Those arguments address different parts of the lawsuit. De minimis is a copyright principle under which copying may be too slight or insignificant to support an infringement claim. Courts can consider the amount taken as well as the importance or recognizability of the copied material, meaning the eight-second duration alone does not determine whether the use amounts to infringement.

Consumer confusion, meanwhile, is central to the false endorsement claim. Druyan-Sagan Associates would have to establish that Luma’s use could cause consumers to believe there was an affiliation, sponsorship or approval that did not exist. The company’s common law unfair competition claim arises from the same alleged commercial use of Sagan’s protected material and identity.

Druyan-Sagan Associates is seeking an unspecified amount of damages and a court order preventing Luma from continuing to use the material. The requested relief includes profits attributed to the alleged infringement, damages and attorney fees.

Luma had not filed a response to the complaint as of the latest available court record. The case remains pending in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.