New York Becomes First State To Require Disclosure of AI Performers in Ads (hollywoodreporter.com)
- Reference: 0180363641
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/25/12/11/1953202/new-york-becomes-first-state-to-require-disclosure-of-ai-performers-in-ads
- Source link: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/new-york-governor-signs-ai-protection-bills-sag-aftra-1236448250/
The first bill compels ad producers to disclose the use of synthetic performers, and the second requires companies to obtain consent from heirs or executors before using a person's name, image, or likeness for commercial purposes after their death. "We will have responsible AI policies in the state of New York," Hochul said. "It's a time where we do want to embrace innovation. But not to the detriment of people."
The signing came the same day Disney [2]announced a partnership allowing users of OpenAI's Sora to create clips featuring Marvel, Pixar, and Star Wars characters.
[1] https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/new-york-governor-signs-ai-protection-bills-sag-aftra-1236448250/
[2] https://slashdot.org/story/25/12/11/1522244/disney-puts-1-billion-into-openai-licenses-200-characters-for-ai-generated-videos-and-images
Not much different from disclosing paid actors (Score:1)
This really isn't any different than requiring advertisements to disclose the use of paid actors. I can see it running into a few problems with internet advertisements though. I'm not sure it really matters though. Some people will buy stupid crap regardless of what kind of labels or warnings are put on something.
Re: (Score:3)
The entire point of any ad is to convince someone to part with their money. It doesn't matter if it's AI or not. Take all advertising with a lump of salt and do your own research before buying something.
This law will just add some white text to the bottom of the commercial at the beginning saying AI was used. Yippie do.
I'm not sure why it even matters but I guess it's a baby step in demanding humans be used in the creation of media.
Re: (Score:2)
"demanding humans be used in the creation of media" government makes many laws, demanding many things. And all of these government demands can be ignored! Once the right government gears are creased with cash.
Re: (Score:3)
Why would you want to require humans be used in the creation of media? Should we ban robots in factories as well?
Re: (Score:3)
*I* don't want to require humans to make ads but lawmakers and other officials that run cities want tax revenue. If AI takes the jobs, that revenue stream from people paying income taxes dries up. So far, we haven't seen an AI tax. Yet.
Probably be challenged (Score:2)
There is too much money at stake, and it seems like a lazy free speech argument would go over well if it made its way to SCOTUS.
Re: (Score:3)
Misrepresentation is not protected by free speech, it should be disclosed; all it will take is one lawsuit winning because a product was used like in the AI generated advertisement resulting in the person being injured. It will be matter-of-course just that car advertisement shown driving a slalom course discloses 'professional driver, closed course' so they don't get sued when a customer tries it on public roads.
There are too many lawyers regardless of how political you may want this to be; it simply is
Good! (Score:2)
I think that AI, as deployed is harmful to society.
In the real world (Score:2)
it might make more sense to label things as "Not Created Using AI". And we would not need to change the laws later. Plus, it will end up being a much shorter list to manage.