standards. and we can get into what else needs to be done. but the main thing is there has to be some accountability or enforcement. let me play something that sag president fran drescher said on this topic. watch. the entire business model has been changed. by streaming, digital, a. i.. this is a moment of history that is a moment of truth. if we don t stand tall right now, we are all going to be in trouble. we are all going to be in jeopardy of being replaced by machines. and to that point, congressman ro khanna, background actors have described how they re light like this is gonna be artificially inserted into the background of a tv or film seem. that means actors who once got paid to work as extras no longer would. what kind of protection should be in place in the labor market
When the union that represents TV and movie actors announced its plans to strike last week, chief negotiator Duncan Crabtree-Ireland talked about concerns relating to the use of artificial intelligence. This is what the studios proposed, he said: “That our background actors should be able to be scanned, get paid for one day’s pay, and their company should own that scan, their image, their .
With the Screen Actors Guild having now joined the Writers Guild of America in a walkout, the actors and writers of most of the nation’s film and television projects are striking together for the first time since 1960 (when SAG was helmed by a charismatic actor named Ronald Reagan). The union members have every right to make demands about how their labor is used or, as the case may be, not .
exist because of the work of these performers, these rioters, the creative talent that make this business run. it s just not only disappointing, it s really outrageous that the companies are prepared to respect their contribution when s the entire foundation of their business. right. let s talk about artificial intelligence. this is startling to me, and i m sure, obviously, to you. the studios allegedly demanded the ability to use a eye on background actors for a day right. then, they would on their image to use however they please forever. why is it so important to have basic guardrails here? i mean, it s absolutely essential. even just in the way you described, to jonathan, that is exactly what their proposal was. the idea that a company should own a person in that way is outrageous. frankly, when they said it to me across the table, i was shocked by it. it is beyond the pale.