Sam Altman's Hollywood Showdown: A Tale of AI, Copyright, and Power
The battle for creative control in Hollywood has reached a boiling point, and Sam Altman is at the center of it all. As the CEO of OpenAI, Altman's recent moves have sent shockwaves through the entertainment industry, leaving many wondering if he's playing a dangerous game.
It all started with whispers of an upcoming social media app, Sora, and the potential threat it posed to Hollywood's intellectual property. A major talent agency, sensing the impending storm, reached out to OpenAI, only to find themselves in a heated debate.
But here's where it gets controversial... OpenAI's representatives, including CFO Brad Lightcap, were accused of being "purposely misleading." They painted a rosy picture of an opt-in regime, promising to protect talent from misuse. However, as talks progressed, it became clear that not everyone was getting the same story.
Some execs were told an opt-in was necessary for both likenesses and intellectual property, while others were given conflicting information. OpenAI's message to Hollywood was anything but clear.
Take, for instance, the case of WME, a talent agency representing stars like Matthew McConaughey and Ryan Reynolds. They were informed that their clients would need to explicitly opt out to prevent their faces and voices from appearing on the platform. A WME partner, in a moment of realization, exclaimed, "Imagine an agent calling a client right now and advocating for them to get onto Sora... It's very likely that client would fire their agent. None of us would make that call."
And this is the part most people miss... On the eve of Sora 2's release, OpenAI made a significant concession. They promised that likenesses wouldn't be used without permission. It was a victory for the agencies, but it left many questioning the true nature of OpenAI's intentions.
Fast forward to a few days later, and Altman announced a pivot to a kind-of-but-not-really opt-in regime. By then, the damage was done. Sora had become the most popular free option on the App Store, and Hollywood was left scrambling.
The Motion Picture Association, usually tight-lipped, felt the need to publicly rebuke OpenAI. CAA and UTA followed suit, with WME's digital strategy head sending a memo to agents, stating that none of their clients were participating in the latest Sora version.
But why is this such a big deal? Well, for starters, AI companies have been training their technology on movies and TV shows for years, often without the consent of the creators. Most of these creators don't own the intellectual property rights to their work, as they're typically commissioned on a work-for-hire basis. So, when AI firms like OpenAI and Midjourney allow users to create content featuring copyrighted characters, it raises serious concerns.
Rob Rosenberg, a partner at legal advisory firm Moses Singer, puts it bluntly: "They're turning copyright on its head. They're setting up this false bargain where they can do this unless you opt out. And if you didn't, it's your fault."
OpenAI's approach to intellectual property rights has been consistent: Ask forgiveness, not permission. It's a risky move, but one that has paid off handsomely for their chatbot products, generating roughly $1 billion a month off the back of 700 million weekly active users, according to The Information.
So, what's next for Hollywood? It's a battle of attrition, and the industry is losing ground. Much like the early days of the internet, when piracy ran rampant, Hollywood is now facing a well-capitalized AI industry that seems intent on exploiting its intellectual property.
The biggest leverage Hollywood has is the prospect of future deals. But OpenAI, with its recent moves, has positioned itself more as an adversary than an ally. As one WME partner put it, "You quite literally set the bridge on fire."
Inside the agencies, there's resentment towards studios for their reluctance to challenge Silicon Valley's intrusion. Some are wondering if the studios should have taken AI companies to court earlier, potentially securing deals that would force the deletion of stolen content from training libraries, much like the settlement authors achieved with Amazon-owned Anthropic.
The future of Hollywood's intellectual property hangs in the balance. Studios are focused on defending their rights, but some may have plans to deploy AI technology in ways that could be impacted by the legal battles they choose to fight. Disney, for example, could create a standalone app like Sora, allowing users to generate interactive content of its properties for a monthly fee. Others may have dealmaking in mind, but the studios' interests might not align with the agencies.
As one WME partner said, "If they sue, they cut themselves off from being able to partner with these companies." It's a delicate balance, and the outcome could shape the future of the entertainment industry.
What do you think? Is OpenAI's approach to intellectual property ethical? Should Hollywood be more proactive in protecting its rights? Leave your thoughts in the comments below!
