Cristian Volpato licenses his AI likeness to Callandor for brand deals
The agreement covers voice, biometric profiles and performance data—not just a digital face. Whether brands will value synthetic appearances like real ones remains unresolved.
Loading page…
The agreement covers voice, biometric profiles and performance data—not just a digital face. Whether brands will value synthetic appearances like real ones remains unresolved.
Listen to this story
Callandor’s exclusive license covers not just Cristian Volpato’s face and voice but also biometric profiles and performance data, giving the California company scope to pursue commercial uses of a synthetic version of the footballer. The arrangement’s business case is still untested: campaigns are in pilot, and it is unclear whether brands will pay for an AI-generated appearance at rates comparable to the player’s own. The deal also highlights unresolved questions about athlete identity rights and approval boundaries in Australian sport.
Callandor co-founder Michael Fisk has proposed multilingual AI book voiceovers and fan apps, but these are ideas rather than available products.
Fisk says Volpato’s digital likeness would be used subject to approval, while also warning that overly aggressive action against fan art could backfire.
Southern Cross University’s Jonathan Harlen says AI licensing involves negotiating multiple interests; he distinguishes human-authored recordings and images from AI reproductions.
Cristian Volpato’s AI double is being pitched as a way to earn endorsement money without taking him away from football. The Socceroos player signed an exclusive licensing deal with Callandor in mid-September, the Guardian reported on October 24. But the company’s campaigns remain in the pilot phase, leaving the commercial promise unproven.
An authorized social media video offers a glimpse of the pitch. Volpato walks through an atrium before four digital copies split off into different settings. Generated scenes show him in a white suit beside Australia’s Twelve Apostles, on a large billboard in a football jersey, and adjusting a grey suit in a mirror.
The agreement gives California-based Callandor exclusive rights to Volpato’s digital likeness, voice, biometric profiles and performance data. Its remit therefore extends beyond producing pictures that resemble the player. The company plans to secure brand deals using his AI image, take a share of the proceeds, and help restrict content he has not approved.
Callandor co-founder Michael Fisk describes the product as a “synthetic twin.” His argument is about the limits of an athlete’s schedule: Volpato is training and playing, and may prefer to spend his remaining time with family and friends rather than on commercial work. Fisk says a digital version could serve brands throughout the year, subject to approval.
A synthetic twin could be used 24-7, year-round by brands. Assuming it’s approved, right?
Michael Fisk, Callandor co-founder, speaking to Guardian Australia
Founded in February, Callandor has a small roster that includes Brazilian footballer Jorginho and American sailor Chris Poole. Fisk, a former Sony Pictures and MGM executive, is pursuing uses beyond conventional advertising. The ideas he described to the Guardian include:
Those are proposed applications, not established capabilities available to fans. Fisk presents one-to-one interaction as an opportunity to reach people whom the real player could never coach individually. A more immediate business question is also unsettled: whether brands will pay as much for an AI clone as for an appearance by the athlete.
The deal also sits within an unsettled rights environment. Contracts with major Australian sporting leagues currently make no mention of AI, according to the Guardian. Jonathan Harlen, an intellectual-property expert at Southern Cross University, describes AI brokerage as a business involving a tangle of interests and rights that require careful negotiation.
Harlen distinguishes copyright in human-created recordings and images from AI reproductions. He says copyright requires human authorship and independent or creative human effort, and does not apply to AI reproductions. His account underlines why negotiating permission to use an athlete’s identity involves more than licensing an existing photograph or recording.
Even Fisk does not advocate treating every unauthorized AI depiction alike. He says a heavy-handed response to fan art could be counterproductive. His concerns include images associating athletes with brands they do not use, words they would never say, and sensitive subjects such as religion or drugs. That leaves Callandor balancing commercial control with the fan activity surrounding its clients.
Loading discussion...
Join the conversation
Explain whether the athlete’s approval would be enough for you.
Be the first to share a perspective or an experience.
Reader comments
Newest comments first. Replies stay oldest first.