"Actors vs Netflix", a 2024 epic drama series by Apple AI TV
As Actors Strike for AI Protections, Netflix Lists $900k AI Job
11–20 of 168 posts
Re: As Actors Strike for AI Protections, Netflix Lists $900k AI Job
#12Am I the only one who genuinely doesn't "get" the AI component of the actor strike? I'm generally in solidarity with labor, but clauses in a labor contract limiting the use of AI in an industry seems kind of insane and unsustainable. Is there any historical analog in the US labor movement?
[deleted]
Re: As Actors Strike for AI Protections, Netflix Lists $900k AI Job
#13I don't see what the problem is. This is perfectly legal. Private companies can do whatever they want with their own money.
Striking is also legal. Now what?
Re: As Actors Strike for AI Protections, Netflix Lists $900k AI Job
#14I would be curious how an AI job in this case would help with the strike breaking. Actors still arguably own their likeness, and it’s legally dubious to use an actors likeness to oust them from a position they would otherwise occupy, but I think it would be very hard to prove in court. I think the real money would be in hiring a legal team robust enough to define this.
It's new territory, and if it plays out in Netflix's disfavor, Netflix can still use AI to generate characters not based on existing actors' likenesses.
Additionally, AI could always be more improved for the script-writing use case.
Re: As Actors Strike for AI Protections, Netflix Lists $900k AI Job
#15If you can create a likeness of Tom Hanks which doesn't need to be Tom Hanks exactly, who owns the copyright - the digital creator or Tom Hanks. Actors protesting AI protections remind me of factory workers protesting against automation setting in.
Why limit yourself to Tom Hanks when the AI can soon create better expression, with quirks and all. The recognizability advantage will fade away as new audiences come along, as long as the quality is very good.
Re: As Actors Strike for AI Protections, Netflix Lists $900k AI Job
#16Am I the only one who genuinely doesn't "get" the AI component of the actor strike? I'm generally in solidarity with labor, but clauses in a labor contract limiting the use of AI in an industry seems kind of insane and unsustainable. Is there any historical analog in the US labor movement?
Imagine that your likeness as an extra is sold for $250, used in future films via AI deep fake, and you never get paid again.
That's my understanding of why they're striking.
Re: As Actors Strike for AI Protections, Netflix Lists $900k AI Job
#17Re: As Actors Strike for AI Protections, Netflix Lists $900k AI Job
#18>So $900k/yr per soldier in their godless AI army when that amount of earnings could qualify thirty-five actors and their families for SAG-AFTRA health insurance is just ghoulish, How many actors could Adam Sandler's $250M Netflix deal pay for?
How long is a piece of string?
Re: As Actors Strike for AI Protections, Netflix Lists $900k AI Job
#19I don't see what the problem is. This is perfectly legal. Private companies can do whatever they want with their own money.
I don't understand these responses. Are you trying to push the window to make people feel like it is unacceptable to be critical of a company's actions? What if I am a shareholder (I am, through ETFs) of Netflix and I disagree with this? Shouldn't I be allowed to discuss and criticize the action?
The only thing you need to understand about people that make comments like that is that they don't care about anything unless (or until) it affects THEM personally.
The second it affects them, now it's real, now it's "OH this shouldn't be legal". Those people lack empathy.
Re: As Actors Strike for AI Protections, Netflix Lists $900k AI Job
#20The headline is drawing all sorts of misleading conclusions. There's a PM posting for an ML team with a $300-900k market range. Nothing to do with actors striking.