FOLLOW US

By Samuel A. Lopez, USA Herald

[HOLLYWOOD, CA] - Hollywood’s biggest stars have united once again, this time warning the world about the so-called “threat” posed by generative AI. Kevin Bacon, Rosario Dawson, and Julianne Moore are just a few of the 11,500 celebrities who signed an open letter urging protections against AI systems training on their work without consent. They argue that the unlicensed use of creative material, including their likenesses and performances, could destroy livelihoods.

As someone who covers the legal sector, I can’t help but see this situation from a broader perspective. Sure, these celebrities want protection from AI abuse, but is this really just about their livelihoods—or does it go deeper, affecting people like you and me?

What’s Really at Stake?
Let’s start by acknowledging the truth: Hollywood has always had a complicated relationship with technological change. Remember when the advent of cable threatened VHS rentals? Or how Redbox fought tooth and nail against online streaming? The result? Redbox movie rentals filed for bankruptcy, and streaming services like Netflix became household names. Similarly, artists panicked when Napster offered free music, yet today, we stream songs freely on YouTube and Spotify. These technologies ultimately made our lives easier, despite the initial resistance from industries.

Now, we see a similar story unfolding with AI. Hollywood elites claim that no one should be able to use their likeness without consent—specifically, AI tools like ChatGPT, DALL·E, and MidJourney, which everyday people use. They argue this is about justice, but it's also a means to restrict the average Joe's use of publicly available information. If the Hollywood elites get their way, you might be blocked from using AI tools for perfectly legal activities like parody, commentary, and scholarship.

A Slippery Slope for AI in Law and Beyond
What concerns me most is how this proposed restriction would extend beyond the glitz and glam of Hollywood. Imagine a world where law firms, like Husch Blackwell’s new AI-focused practice group, can't use AI tools to efficiently analyze vast amounts of data, including public records on celebrities. This would severely hamper legal professionals' ability to represent clients in entertainment law cases, intellectual property disputes, and even historical research.

Here’s a thought: how would an attorney ethically analyze a case involving a celebrity’s public persona if AI tools are blocked from training on publicly available information? It would create significant roadblocks for those in my profession who depend on fast, reliable AI tools to perform complex legal analyses. Blocking AI from training on celebrity data could cripple not just the entertainment sector but law, medicine, and countless other industries. AI isn't just a "threat" to Hollywood—it's a tool for innovation across all sectors. Restricting its use to the public would set a dangerous precedent.