The WGA’s proposal to regulate use of material produced using artificial intelligence or similar technologies ensures the Companies can’t use AI to undermine writers’ working standards including compensation, residuals, separated rights and credits. #WGAStrong 🧵1/7

AI can’t be used as source material, to create MBA-covered writing or rewrite MBA-covered work, and AI-generated text cannot be considered in determining writing credits. 2/7

Our proposal is that writers may not be assigned AI-generated material to adapt, nor may AI software generate covered literary material. 3/7

In the same way that a studio may point to a Wikipedia article, or other research material, and ask the writer to refer to it, they can make the writer aware of AI-generated content. 4/7

But, like all research material, it has no role in guild-covered work, nor in the chain of title in the intellectual property.

It is important to note that AI software does not create anything. It generates a regurgitation of what it's fed. 5/7

If it's been fed both copyright-protected and public domain content, it cannot distinguish between the two. Its output is not eligible for copyright protection, nor can an AI software program sign a certificate of authorship. 6/7

To the contrary, plagiarism is a feature of the AI process. #WGAStrong #WGAContract2023 #1u 7/7