634
TV producers wanted AI rights of extras forever, says union
(www.theregister.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 14 Jul 2023
634 points (98.9% liked)
Technology
60052 readers
3471 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Which is why these union negotiations are so important. Sure, that will probably happen. But if SAG-AFTRA says they can’t be used on union shows, well, they won’t be lol
When I first started in film any time I had a SAG actor there were requirements I had to adhere to for their pay and hours, no exceptions. And I live in a right to work state!
Right-to-work is the work-for-welfare program. I would imagine it would have no impact on people who aren't applying for social services.
I'm assuming the overlap between right-to-work and at-will-empmloyment states is a near perfect circle, though. And the fun thing about at-will employment is that it's totally nullified by an actual, mutually negoatiated employment contract, with, like, responsibilities laid on the employer and consequences for failing to perform them. You know, like what you get with a strong union.
49 states are "at will"
"right to work" aka fuk ur union boy is limited to southern degeneracy along with maybe Michigan.
It’s meant to emphasize the power of SAG-AFTRA not endorse my region’s regressive work/social policies.
I think they were saying “and this is in spite of me working in a ‘right-to-work’ state”
Bingo.
I think this is the right-to-work they were referring to: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-to-work_law. It’s a type of law that undercuts unions by preventing shops from requiring union membership for employment.
Union shows immidiately get outcompeted by AI generation and all studios doing business with them go out of business.
AI is the future here guys. Union won't stop it. They'll just drag Hollywood down with them.
Only if Hollywood wants to go completely non-union. Good luck with that. IATSE isn't going to crow a movie if SAG-AFTRA and the WGA aren't involved. Maybe they'll find enough non-union crew to do a big time movie, but they'll be making it in the Philippines.
Or in America.
In the long term, AI is going to be such a massive force multiplier that you'll be able to get away with non union writers and actors.
If all goes well you will be able to produce a film in your basement and have it rival the quantity of the current big boys. That will be a long while, but in the meantime any industry that loses a 2x productivity boost will die to its competition.
Especially in the modern world. Centralized stars and production is crazy in a world where you can pull out a camera and buy a rendering supercomputer for a few thousand dollars.
Maybe years down the road, but we're talking about today. Making a non-union movie and expecting it to be something like a Marvel movie- it won't. It will be a movie that will end up on Mystery Science Theater 3000 because it will suck.
A deal made today will still be in effect in a decade, and the use of AI is already in effect in smaller ways, especially with the deage tech.
There’s a difference between “no AI allowed” (not what the unions are calling for) and “contracts need stipulations about AI usage” (reasonable).
If you are not familiar with what is actually being negotiated over, then please don’t weigh in. WGA/SAG-AFTRA are not calling for an AI ban. Every time these debates come up armchair AI “advocates” swarm like cryptobros to call everyone backwards/ignorant/resistant to change regardless of the context.
If those contacts include paying actors as much as they would have needed to act and restricting it's usage when writing scripts the difference is moot. If your erase all benefit to using AI it becomes worthless.
They 100 percent want to reduce AI usage so that writers can't be automated away.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/29/business/media/writers-guild-hollywood-ai-chatgpt.html
Yes I agree. That is what I’ve been saying this entire time.
I don’t see the problem. Want to use AI to fart out cheap written content or highjack someone’s script? Don’t use the studio system. It’s never been easier to shoot and distribute without Hollywood/unions.
Either way, AI isn’t banned from Hollywood. They are calling for regulation on specific use cases involving union writers.
Reduce =/= ban
I can assure you that AI is not anywhere near the level you think it is right now.
I use it every day. I didn't say it was as that level. I said it would get there in the future.