[wonderwonder]

I read a claim stating that studios were requesting that actors sign over their ai generated likeness to the studios in perpetuity. Which if accurate is insane. Dude could appear for 5 minutes in a movie as an extra, get paid $500 and then never get paid again but show up in hundreds of movies.

[ars]

Why is that insane? He worked for 5 minutes only. Most people don't get paid over and over for working just once.

And in any case it would be easy enough to create a hybrid likeness that combines a few people, with the final result looking like none of them, if you have an issue with the image of someone being used.

[stonogo]

How the hell do you build an acting career if the studios can just photgraph you once and then use your likeness forever? It's obviously exploitative. This is why unions exist.

[ars]

It's not meant for people who are planning an acting career. There's only like 10,000 or so people in the entire guild who have an acting career (using SAG-AFTRA's figures), the rest only do it occasionally. And of those, barely 3,000 actually make any real money.

Acting is not really a viable job career in general, except for those few who get lucky.

> This is why unions exist.

I know, they exist to keep their members in jobs. But the world is changing, and their jobs are changing.

[RyanAdamas]

I don't think you understand what the future holds. Everyone can have a studio scan their bodies and faces and then they can be the ones in the movies.

No more actors.

[wonderwonder]

He works for 5 minutes because he is never hired again because they have rights to his likeness and can just drop an animated him into any movie. They could make him the main actor in a block buster and he gets $0.

[ars]

Yes, that's an option, but if you don't want that don't agree to such a job.

[kadoban]

Great advice. Hard to take when you're broke and trying to make rent though.

So they should have basic, agreed standards of what appropriate agreements look like, negotiated as a group.

[ars]

> Hard to take when you're broke and trying to make rent though.

Are you upset they aren't making as much money as they possibly can, rather than what is available?

Chasing the ultimate amount of money isn't a practical strategy.

> So they should have basic, agreed standards of what appropriate agreements look like, negotiated as a group.

That certainly makes it faster - you don't need to negotiate individually, instead "take it or leave it", and hopefully it's a good deal for both.

But it's not like such an agreement is required, if someone wants to negotiate something else, nothing is stopping them.

And you can be sure that some indie company will decide to leapfrog the studios and do exactly that with non union models.

[kadoban]

> Are you upset they aren't making as much money as they possibly can, rather than what is available?

I'm not particularly upset at the moment about anything. I disagree that one should have to choose between eating today and having a chance at a real career though.

> That certainly makes it faster - you don't need to negotiate individually, instead "take it or leave it", and hopefully it's a good deal for both.

That's not what I'm suggesting. The absolute basics that ensure human decency should not need to be negotiated every time though. Use those at the starting point, and people can negotiate individually from there.

> And you can be sure that some indie company will decide to leapfrog the studios and do exactly that with non union models.

Why haven't they done it yet? Every one of my favorite shows and movies that I can think of are using union actors and writers.