The WGA has “established regulations for the use of artificial intelligence (“AI”) on MBA-covered projects in the following ways:”
www.wgacontract2023.org/the-campaign...
I hope there's a broad definition of what they call "AI" in the document, to avoid some loopholes by just redefining generated content as not being AI (which technically it is not).
No. But it means they can't get an actual writer to work on an LLM-created script at all without that writer getting treated as the sole writer and getting appropriate credit and pay.
Thanks for clarifying. At some point, probably in the near future, we have to start thinking about saving their jobs too, not just their credit and pay. AI scripts *will* eventually be good enough for at least half of the audience not to notice the difference, which is incredibly sad :/
They really won't. The reason execs wanted to do this wasn't so they could actually generate usable scripts, which isn't happening any time soon with this technology or any like it, but so they could just pay writers rewrite fees for a full script.
The latter, maybe. But as for the former, it's been a special interest of mine for many years and I understand the technical aspects fairly well. You don't get to actually replacing humans *ever* by iterating on this approach.
Pretty sure this says that even if you create something that nobody else has created, if you use GPT to do it, it's not yours. Yeah sorry that's absolutely ableist. Yes these are more than just spell checkers, etc. But speaking of which, all the grammar assistant, error checking, etc. in modern...
applications? Those are all utilize AI. So if you cannot attribute anything which is a product of AI to you, basically if you use any modern software, it could be argued that it's not attributable to you.
But I might be misunderstanding the agreement. Who get attributed if a writer utilizes ChatGPT in the creation of a novel piece according to the agreement?
🤔 How is it nowadays, if You create an analogue collage?
Do You ask the photographer, if You are allowed to use the printed picture from the magazine? Do You think You should give credit, when You use what You have bought/paid for?
All this is quite wired, isn't it?
seems to me like the opposite, saying that if you create something with AI assistance it still counts as your writing and they can't credit the AI as a coauthor and reduce your pay as a result?
as far as i can tell the specific issue they're addressing with that seems to be the execs handing writers an AI generated script and telling them to fix it up into something usable and then paying them less because they were adapting someone else's writing instead of writing something original
But I might be misunderstanding the agreement. Who get attributed if a writer utilizes ChatGPT in the creation of a novel piece according to the agreement?
Honest question: Why would a writer ever choose to use AI when performing writing services? I genuinely don't understand why this provision was necessary. Not trying to be snarky.
