“This ‘groundbreaking’ AI proposal that they gave us yesterday, they proposed that our background performers should be able to be scanned, get one day’s pay, and their companies should own that scan, their image, their likeness and should be able to use it for the rest of eternity on any project they want, with no consent and no compensation. So if you think that’s a groundbreaking proposal, I suggest you think again.”

  • fearout@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    I mean, sure, let’s use it and have fun. No one is really arguing total bans. But you have to pay people when you use their likenesses. Otherwise, you know, Metahuman exists.

    • Margot Robbie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Of course. The law already protect the right of people’s likeness when used commercially, but there are still some questions surrounding that.

      For example, whenever somebody makes one of these ultra-realistic sketches of celebrities based on photographs on the Internet like on r/art and tries to sell them, should they also pay the original photographer and the original subject? Supreme Court recently said yes 7-2 in their latest ruling on “Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith”, with Kagan being a notable dissent. Give it a read, food for thought.