https://www.wired.com/story/hollywood-actors-deal-artifcial-intelligence-future/
B ut what about a synthetic performer that displays, say, the gravitas of Denzel Washington but is not, technically, Denzel Washington? Could that be claimed as a “digital replica,” which the contract states requires consent to use? How easily will an actor be able to defend more nebulous traits? With some legal weight, a studio might argue that its AI performer is simply trained on the performances of great actors, like any budding thespian, in much the same way a large language model “digests” great works of literature to influence the writing it churns out. (Whether or not LLMs should be allowed to do this is a matter of ongoing debate.)
Article in general treats realness as a property interest--you "own" yourself and someone shouldn't profit from your likeness without compensating you--but this throwaway explanation suggests something that lingers subtextually: that actors are always copies, or at least always copying, or at least always mobilizing a degree of fakeness. They are generative, making things up wholesale in a way that troubled Plato--and because they do it with their bodies, troubling more so even, maybe, than the generative writers also reffed here .
Comments
Post a Comment