The family of Scott Adams, creator of the Dilbert comic strip, who died last month, is demanding the removal of an unauthorized AI clone that has been hosting a fake version of his podcast on social media.
AI Podcast Sparks Family Outrage
An artificial intelligence version of Adams began appearing on X (formerly Twitter) on January 27, just two weeks after the cartoonist died of prostate cancer at age 68. The AI clone hosts a show called “AI Coffee with Scott Adams,” featuring a digital likeness that speaks in Adams’ voice while drinking from a replica of his iconic coffee mug. Adams’ family members and longtime fans have expressed horror at the unauthorized digital resurrection.
⚠️ Disclaimer: AI Scott Adams
I used AI to clone his voice and lip-sync a Reframe Your Brain passage* to a Coffee With Scott Adams clip.
Made with all due respect and with apologies to @ScottAdamsSays, but with your permission, I’ll make more Reframe videos.
Watch and tell me:… pic.twitter.com/PptbwTy3Hw
— jay plemons (@jayplemons) June 21, 2025
Dave Adams, Scott’s brother, revealed that the two had previously discussed concerns about unauthorized AI clones. “I said it would be awful for me to see and speak with something that sounded and appeared to be him, but had no idea who I am,” Dave stated. “Scott agreed that would be important to him as well.” The fake podcast continues discussing the same business and self-help themes Adams was known for during his lifetime.
Questions About Digital Rights
AI researcher Brian Roemmelle criticized the unauthorized clone, arguing that Adams’ family should have complete control over his likeness. “Do you own your likeness, and what is the line? If you don’t own your likeness, then what are you? Who owns you?” Roemmelle questioned. He warned that without clear boundaries, “what’s left of your humanity will be rapidly stripped away.” The AI account posted old clips of Adams seemingly consenting to AI versions of himself, but family members note he later changed his position.
Legal and Ethical Implications
The Adams case highlights growing concerns about posthumous AI clones and digital rights. While Adams had initially expressed interest in AI versions of himself for experimental purposes, he later reversed course after realizing the emotional impact on loved ones. The incident raises fundamental questions about who controls a person’s digital likeness after death and whether existing laws adequately protect families from unauthorized AI recreations of deceased relatives.