A video script is advertising, whether it is read on camera, spoken by an AI voice, or narrated over drone footage of the property. That means the script an AI tool drafts for you has to clear the same rules a printed flyer clears — not a looser bar because the medium is new.
Key takeaways
It is tempting to treat an AI-drafted video script as a rough outline — something looser than a printed ad because it is meant to sound conversational. The REALTOR® Code does not draw that distinction. Article 13’s heading is “Advertising – Content/Accuracy,” and its opening line requires that “all Advertising and promotion of properties shall accurately reflect property and other details and prominently display the name of the brokerage.” Article 13.2 goes further for anything hosted online: “the Internet website of a REALTOR® is an Advertising vehicle… all properties displayed and all representations made on a website must comply with the REALTOR® Code.” A property video posted to your site or social channel is exactly that kind of representation.
Article 13.1 sets the actual rule for what has to appear: a REALTOR® may not advertise, or let anyone affiliated with them advertise, “real estate services or property without disclosing the name of the REALTOR®’s brokerage in a readily apparent fashion.” There is a narrow exception built for exactly the format a short video sits in: “if disclosing the name of the REALTOR®’s brokerage is impractical because of the nature of the display (e.g. text message, tweet, etc…) then no such disclosure is required, provided there is a link to a display that includes all of the required disclosures.” An AI-drafted script that never mentions the brokerage is fine only if the platform it runs on genuinely cannot carry the disclosure and links out to something that does — check that condition before assuming the exception covers you.
An AI tool asked to make a script sound persuasive will often reach for a superlative — the fastest-selling home on the street, the top agent in the area. Article 15.2 of the REALTOR® Code sets a specific, checkable bar for that kind of line: “representations of performance (e.g. ‘#1,’ ‘top-selling,’ etc.) must include the geographical area referred to, the relevant time-frame… and the source or basis on which the claim is based.” Article 15.6 removes any doubt about where that obligation comes from: “any claims or offerings in advertising must also comply with all applicable laws, including the Competition Act.” That statute puts the burden of proof on the person making the claim, not on whoever might challenge it — the Competition Act’s performance-claim provision covers a representation about “the performance, efficacy or length of life of a product that is not based on an adequate and proper test thereof, the proof of which lies on the person making the representation.” An AI-generated superlative with no number behind it fails that test before anyone even checks whether it is true.
Copyright in a work follows the author, and the Copyright Act’s starting position is simple: “the author of a work shall be the first owner of the copyright therein.” A drafting session with an AI tool complicates the question of who counts as the author, but it does not eliminate the underlying rule — if you commission a freelance editor, videographer or copywriter to finish and film the script, ownership does not automatically move to you just because you paid for the work and prompted the draft. It moves only on the terms of your agreement, and the Act requires that agreement to be explicit: “no assignment or grant is valid unless it is in writing signed by the owner.” A verbal understanding that “the video is ours” is not an assignment. Put the ownership term in writing with anyone else who touches the finished product, the same way you would for a photographer’s listing photos.
If the finished video uses an AI-generated voiceover or an on-screen avatar rather than a real presenter, the safest posture is to say so rather than let a viewer assume it is you on camera. Canada has no statute requiring that disclosure for a real estate video specifically, but the federal government’s own reference point for what “good” looks like points the same way: the ISED Voluntary Code of Conduct on advanced generative AI — whose 46 signatories include the Organisme d’autoréglementation du courtage immobilier du Québec, Quebec’s own real estate regulator — commits managers of a public-facing AI system to “ensure that systems that could be mistaken for humans are clearly and prominently identified as AI systems.” The code binds only its signatories, not you, but it is a useful line for judging your own video: if a viewer could reasonably think the presenter is a real person, a brief on-screen note costs you almost nothing and removes the question entirely. RECO’s bulletin on online advertising extends the same discipline past publication: “photos and video content, such as virtual showings, cannot remain online past the end date identified in the written consent.”
Related: using AI to explain a market report, the glossary entry on synthetic media disclosure, and the case file on a virtually staged photo published without a label.
Article 13.1 lets a format-limited display skip it only if a link leads somewhere that carries the full disclosure — the exemption is for the format’s limits, not for convenience. If the video has room for a caption or a link in bio, that is likely enough to satisfy it; if the video stands entirely alone with no link, put the brokerage name on screen.
Nothing in the REALTOR® Code bars it, but disclose it plainly if a viewer might otherwise believe a real person is presenting. That is the same standard the ISED Voluntary Code sets for AI systems that could be mistaken for a human.
That question turns on your agreement with the AI vendor, not on who typed the prompt — check the tool’s terms of service for what it says about output ownership. Once a human editor, videographer or agency reworks the draft, get that party’s assignment of rights in writing too, per the Copyright Act’s signed-writing requirement.
A short call is enough to map where AI tools help your practice and where a human read-through still has to happen.
