How Hollywood is avoiding robot overlords

This the conversation still has a purpose.
Photo: Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer

If there’s one thing people in Hollywood know, it’s robots who rule. Everyone watched 2001: A Space Odyssey! They know what happens when the robots run amok! In fact, it’s part of what the guilds are trying to avoid with the current SAG-AFTRA and WGA strikes. Hollywood strikes historically occur when technology is changing and contracts have not reached. With advances in AI happening seemingly on a daily basis, guilds are nervous about what might happen if they don’t get their AI policies in check before the technology progresses to the point where they’re fired from their jobs.

This is partly due to historical precedent, antiquated contracts cost the WGA a lot of money in the 1980s and after. Basically, the deal was developed before VHS and DVD became much easier to produce, but talent has never gotten a better deal. The remaining formula for home video, which was a technological shift at the time, was agreed upon in the 1980s and has never been updated, Jonathan Handel, a journalist and entertainment lawyer, tells Vulture. He wiped out 80 percent of the revenue before calculating the remainder, and this reflected the cost of manufacturing VHS tape cassettes. Then came discs and you could print content in bulk for pennies, and the formula never got more lucrative for talent. Given strikes, we can see how difficult it is to make a good contract, but even harder to change the language of a contract once it has been written. Contracts are like Roach Motels, says Handel. The terms of the contract are recorded, but do not occur. So when there is a resident, you want to make sure that he is one you can live with. But not all guilds want or need exactly the same thing when it comes to AI. With that in mind, a roundup of various guild contract controversies regarding AI.

While the WGA and SAG-AFTRA are currently on strike, the Directors Guild is standing on the sidelines. On June 23, he finalized his contract with the AMPTP, which included the first AI guidelines for any guild contract. The DGA describes the new contract as a groundbreaking agreement that confirms that AI is not a person and that generative AI is no substitute for the duties performed by members. The agreement also stipulates that employers cannot use GAI [Generative AI] in connection with creative elements without consultation with the director or other employees covered by DGA in accordance with the requirements of the DGA basic agreement, according to Variety. Additionally, the DGA will receive two meetings a year with the AMPTP to discuss advances in the technology.

While the DGA managed to come to terms with their settlement, the WGA and SAG-AFTRA are not so happy. Artificial intelligence has become one of the mobilizing forces in the WGA’s fight against the AMPTP. In a May 1 document, the WGA requests the AMPTP in detail, including that it regulate the use of AI on MBA-covered projects and that AI may not write or rewrite literary material; cannot be used as starting material; and the material covered by MBA cannot be used to train AI. The same document described the counter-offer of the AMPTP: Rejected our proposal. Countered by offering annual meetings to discuss advances in technology.

Probably because they watched Joan Is Awful. While the WGA doesn’t seem to want to include any AI in their process, the SAG seems more interested in monitoring the rights of actors as AI becomes part of their process. We are not here to block artificial intelligence, Duncan Crabtree-Ireland, national executive director of SAG-AFTRA, told MSNBC on July 16. These limits were spelled out in a document released by SAG-AFTRA on July 17 in which it proposes to establish a comprehensive set of provisions to protect man-made work and require informed consent and fair compensation when a digital replica of an artist is made, or when their voice, likeness or performance will be substantially altered using artificial intelligence. SAG-AFTRA recounting AMPTP’s response, while lacking specific counteroffers, makes it clear that the response has not been satisfactory. It failed to address many vital concerns, leaving lead actors and supporting actors vulnerable to having most of their work replaced with digital replicas, it reads.

While the contract for the International Alliance of Theater Stage Employees doesn’t expire until next year, that doesn’t mean the members aren’t thought. IATSE, which covers skilled labor in the entertainment industry, is vulnerable to the potential of AIs. Therefore, in May, it created an Artificial Intelligence Commission, which on July 5 released its core principles for the applications of artificial intelligence and machine learning technology. The core principles covered seven topics: research, collaboration, education, policy and legislative advocacy, organizing and collective bargaining. Like SAG-AFTRA, IATSE is not interested in banning AI from the workplace, but is interested in seeing it as a tool for workers, rather than a substitute. While IATSE’s demands on the AMPTP won’t become perfectly clear until contract negotiations begin next year, its point on collective bargaining clarifies the corporations’ perspective. We are committed to negotiating provisions addressing AI in our future contracts, the section said. IATSE requires transparency from employers regarding their use of AI, even in the absence of relevant government legislation. We are committed to safeguarding our members’ privacy rights and ensuring that AI applications adhere to the highest ethical standards, including non-discrimination and fairness.