The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, the United States-based honorary organization behind the Academy Awards, on Friday published new rules stating that artificial intelligence-generated performances and screenplays will not qualify for Oscars.
On May 1, the Academy announced several significant rule changes for the 99th Oscars, scheduled for March 2027, including two notable additions that address the controversial topic of AI.
Specifically, for all the acting categories, only roles “credited in the film’s legal billing and demonstrably performed by humans with their consent” will be considered eligible; while in the writing categories—namely, ‘best adapted screenplay’ and ‘best original screenplay’—the Academy stated that “the rules codify that screenplays must be human-authored to be eligible.”
Other prominent categories, such as ‘best director,’ ‘best cinematography,’ and ‘best film editing,’ were presumably deemed beyond the capabilities of current AI, and thus no new rules were added regarding their use. However, for ‘best visual effects,’ a category in which AI can, and already is being applied, the Academy chose not to officially prohibit work that uses the technology.
A previous iteration of the rules, published by the Academy’s Board of Governors on April 23, was more lenient to AI, stating that: “With regard to Generative Artificial Intelligence and other digital tools used in the making of the film, the tools neither help nor harm the chances of achieving a nomination. The Academy and each branch will judge the achievement, taking into account the degree to which a human was at the heart of the creative authorship when choosing which movie to award.”
It added that, “if questions arise regarding the aforementioned use of Generative Artificial Intelligence, the Academy reserves the right to request more information about the nature of the use and human authorship.”
The Academy’s seeming change of heart in the weeks following the release of these rules signals that most prestigious movie award bodies in the world appear to have picked a side in the increasingly intense debate around the merits of AI-assisted creativity, particularly when it comes to generating scripts, altering performances, or recreating actors.
The rules update comes at a time when a number of film productions have announced that they intend to use AI in some form, leading to a backlash from other leading Hollywood players critical of AI’s potential role in filmmaking.
AI battle lines being drawn
In September of last year, leading actors’ union SAG-AFTRA felt compelled to release a statement on the announcement that “Tilly Norwood,” an A.I.-generated “actor” developed by London-based Xicoia, was seeking representation.
“SAG-AFTRA believes creativity is, and should remain, human-centered. The union is opposed to the replacement of human performers by synthetics,” said the statement. “To be clear, “Tilly Norwood” is not an actor, it’s a character generated by a computer program that was trained on the work of countless professional performers — without permission or compensation… It doesn’t solve any “problem” — it creates the problem of using stolen performances to put actors out of work, jeopardizing performer livelihoods and devaluing human artistry.”
SAG-AFTRA also warned that “signatory producers should be aware that they may not use synthetic performers without complying with our contractual obligations, which require notice and bargaining whenever a synthetic performer is going to be used.”
However, not all Hollywood creatives take the same stance as the actors’ union.
In February, lauded Hollywood director Darren Aronofsky’s studio Primordial Soup released—to much furor—“On This Day … 1776, ” a series of short videos depicting America’s revolutionary war voiced by real actors but with entirely AI-generated images.
Under the new Academy rules, anything made along the lines of “On This Day … 1776” would more likely be considered an animated film, if it were to be considered at all, while “Killing Satoshi” would have to prove that its adjusted performances remained “demonstrably” human—and even then it would still be up to the Academy judges to decide whether they agreed.
When it comes to broader awards predictions, with the acting and writing Oscars now being restricted to human creativity and performance, it is almost certain other major award bodies and ceremonies in the film industry and beyond will soon follow suit.
In order for artificial intelligence (AI) to work right within the law and thrive in the face of growing challenges, it needs to integrate an enterprise blockchain system that ensures data input quality and ownership—allowing it to keep data safe while also guaranteeing the immutability of data. Check out CoinGeek’s coverage on this emerging tech to learn more why Enterprise blockchain will be the backbone of AI.
Watch | Can we trust AI? How blockchain and IPv6 could fix accountability
Be the first to comment