Connect with us

Business

Hollywood writers say AI is ripping off their work. They want studios to sue

Published

on

Hollywood writers say AI is ripping off their work. They want studios to sue

When the Writers Guild of America approved a contract with major studios in 2023, ending a 148-day strike, the union became the first bargaining group to gain significant guardrails around artificial intelligence in Hollywood.

But as AI innovation continues to advance, writers say they need more protection from studios. Now, they’re urging entertainment companies to take legal action against AI firms that they allege are using writers’ work to train AI models without their permission.

John Rogers, a 58-year-old screenwriter in L.A., has spent years co-creating the world of TV drama series “Leverage.” After experimenting with ChatGPT, Rogers said he and the show’s creative team suspected that 77 episodes of the series — or five years’ worth of work — had been ripped off and used to fuel AI.

Rogers said that in 2023, after generative AI took off as a mainstream business, he asked ChatGPT to suggest an episode plot for “Leverage,” a modern day Robin Hood story about a former insurance investigator who works with a team of criminals that steals from unscrupulous rich people and compensates those they have hurt.

Advertisement

Without Rogers prompting the chatbot with character names, ChatGPT suggested a plot idea about taking down a corrupt CEO using characters from the show on its own, Rogers said.

Then he found out that scripts for “Leverage,” along with other shows Rogers was involved with, including 2007’s “Transformers” and the TNT series “The Librarians,” were included in a database that was used to train AI models. That data set had subtitles from OpenSubtitles.org, a website that provides subtitles to movies and TV shows in different languages, according to a November story from the Atlantic.

“I’m angry at the absolute arrogance of these companies,” Rogers said. “These companies have gotten hundreds of billions of dollars of value that would not exist if not for our work.”

The guild sent a letter in December to leaders at major studios, including Netflix, Amazon MGM Studios, Sony Pictures Entertainment, Paramount Global, NBCUniversal, Walt Disney Co. and Warner Bros. Discovery. When reached by The Times, those studios either declined or did not respond to a request for comment on the guild’s letter.

So far, no major studio has filed a lawsuit against any of the big AI companies, despite the writers’ complaints. There have been no publicly announced content licensing deals with AI companies, but some major studios have held discussions with AI firms about the technology, causing concerns among Hollywood talent that more of their jobs will be automated to save money.

Advertisement

“The studios own the copyrights to our material that’s being stolen, so they have grounds for legal action, and that’s why we wrote the letter,” Meredith Stiehm, president of the WGA West, said in an interview. “Frankly, they’ve been negligent. They have not protested the theft of this copyrighted material by the AI companies, and it’s a capitulation on their part to still be on the sidelines.”

The tensions come as the contract between the guild and the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers is set to expire in May 2026. Intellectual property rights and AI will surely be an important element in the upcoming negotiations, said David Smith, a professor of economics at the Pepperdine Graziadio Business School.

“They’re highlighting that it’s going to be a central concern, a key issue that is going to determine how negotiations go,” Smith said regarding the WGA’s letter.

Many writers, including Rogers, Stiehm, “The Killing” creator Veena Sud and “Grey’s Anatomy” co-creator Shonda Rhimes, were listed in a database that the Atlantic created to show what subtitles were used to train AI models from companies, including Facebook owner Meta and Anthropic.

“I’m stunned, disgusted, horrified at what is essentially straight-up plagiarism,” Sud said in a statement. “These AI developers will keep stealing my and other writers’ words until a court finds it illegal, until the studios take action against this theft, and/or until policymakers require developers to negotiate and pay artists for use of our material. It’s a pretty basic concept: Pay the worker for their work.”

Advertisement

The tech industry has said that it should be able to train its AI models with content available online under the “fair use” doctrine, which allows for the limited reproduction of material without permission from the copyright holder.

“We respect intellectual property rights and believe our use of information to train AI models is consistent with existing law,” Meta said in a statement.

Anthropic did not return a request for comment.

“We build our AI models using publicly available data, in a manner protected by fair use and related principles, and supported by long-standing and widely accepted legal precedents,” OpenAI said in a statement. “We view this principle as fair to creators, necessary for innovators, and critical for US competitiveness.”

The problem is what constitutes “publicly available” and how that material becomes accessible to the AI models.

Advertisement

When a writer sells their work to a studio, the studio owns the copyright to that material. Lisa Callif, a partner with Los Angeles law firm Donaldson Callif Perez, said she believes that studios would have legal standing to sue the AI companies.

“The tricky part is whether or not the studios agree that the works have to be defended,” Callif said. “The studios have a vested interest in these AI platforms being developed and being useful to them.”

The current contract between the WGA and AMPTP contains language to ensure that there is a human writer behind every script. Writers must be notified if they are given research or intellectual property that uses AI, and a writer cannot be made to use AI in their work if they don’t want to, the contract says. But there is nothing in the agreement that addresses compensation when a writer’s work is used to train AI models.

“We didn’t get everything we wanted on training, and that’s why we so urge the studios to do something about this scraping of our material,” Stiehm said.

The AMPTP declined to comment for this story.

Advertisement

Some studios are working with AI companies as they look for ways to cut costs. For example, “Hunger Games” studio Lionsgate has a partnership with New York AI company Runway to create a new model for Lionsgate to help with behind-the-scenes processes such as storyboarding.

Tech giants like Amazon (which operates the Prime Video streaming service and MGM Studios) and YouTube parent company Google have invested billions of dollars in Anthropic. YouTube last year unveiled a feature for its video creators to help them brainstorm ideas.

Companies want to use artificial intelligence but are also wary about upsetting Hollywood talent.

OpenAI has been in exploratory talks with studios about how they could use its text-to-video tool Sora, according to an OpenAI partnerships lead who wanted to speak anonymously because the discussions are ongoing. Sora has been used to make music videos, commercials and short films. The discussions have not involved licensing whole libraries of content, this person said.

OpenAI has met with Warner Bros. Discovery and Disney, according to several other people familiar with the matter who declined to be named because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly.

Advertisement

Suing the AI giants would be expensive and time consuming. Countries around the world have different rules for copyright holders, making the legal landscape challenging.

Nonetheless, AI companies are facing several copyright lawsuits from publishers such as the New York Times and music giants, including Universal Music Group.

The results of the pending cases will help guide other entertainment companies’ next moves, experts said.

“It has massive implications in the industry,” said media lawyer Kailin Che at entertainment law firm Feig/Finkel. “I think everyone’s gonna wait and see what happens there.”

On Tuesday, a judge ruled in favor of Thomson Reuters in its lawsuit against AI startup Ross Intelligence, which it accused of reproducing work from its research firm Westlaw, according to reports. The judge rejected Ross’ possible defenses, including on “fair use.”

Advertisement

John Lopez, a 44-year-old writer who has worked on drama series “The Terminal List” and “Strange Angel,” said he’s worried that up and coming writers will have a harder time breaking in, adding that the technology also devalues the work and artistry of screenwriting.

“This was blood, sweat and tears and work and love, and it was transformed into just value for them,” Rogers said.

Business

‘Stranger Things’ finale turns box office downside up pulling in an estimated $25 million

Published

on

‘Stranger Things’ finale turns box office downside up pulling in an estimated  million

The finale of Netflix’s blockbuster series “Stranger Things” gave movie theaters a much needed jolt, generating an estimated $20 to $25 million at the box office, according to multiple reports.

Matt and Ross Duffer’s supernatural thriller debuted simultaneously on the streaming platform and some 600 cinemas on New Year’s Eve and held encore showings all through New Year’s Day.

Owing to the cast’s contractual terms for residuals, theaters could not charge for tickets. Instead, fans reserved seats for performances directly from theaters, paying for mandatory food and beverage vouchers. AMC and Cinemark Theatres charged $20 for the concession vouchers while Regal Cinemas charged $11 — in homage to the show’s lead character, Eleven, played by Millie Bobby Brown.

AMC Theatres, the world’s largest theater chain, played the finale at 231 of its theaters across the U.S. — which accounted for one-third of all theaters that held screenings over the holiday.

The chain said that more than 753,000 viewers attended a performance at one of its cinemas over two days, bringing in more than $15 million.

Advertisement

Expectations for the theater showing was high.

“Our year ends on a high: Netflix’s Strangers Things series finale to show in many AMC theatres this week. Two days only New Year’s Eve and Jan 1.,” tweeted AMC’s CEO Adam Aron on Dec. 30. “Theatres are packed. Many sellouts but seats still available. How many Stranger Things tickets do you think AMC will sell?”

It was a rare win for the lagging domestic box office.

In 2025, revenue in the U.S. and Canada was expected to reach $8.87 billion, which was marginally better than 2024 and only 20% more than pre-pandemic levels, according to movie data firm Comscore.

With few exceptions, moviegoers have stayed home. As of Dec. 25., only an estimated 760 million tickets were sold, according to media and entertainment data firm EntTelligence, compared with 2024, during which total ticket sales exceeded 800 million.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

Tesla dethroned as the world’s top EV maker

Published

on

Tesla dethroned as the world’s top EV maker

Elon Musk’s Tesla is no longer the top electric vehicle seller in the world as demand at home has cooled while competition heated up abroad.

Tesla lost its pole position after reporting 1.64 million deliveries in 2025, roughly 620,000 fewer than Chinese competitor BYD.

Tesla struggled last year amid increasing competition, waning federal support for electric vehicle adoption and brand damage triggered by Musk’s stint in the White House.

Musk is turning his focus toward robotics and autonomous driving technology in an effort to keep Tesla relevant as its EVs lose popularity.

On Friday, the company reported lower than expected delivery numbers for the fourth quarter of 2025, a decline from the previous quarter and a year-over-year decrease of 16%. Tesla delivered 418,227 vehicles in the fourth quarter and produced 434,358.

Advertisement

According to a company-compiled consensus from analysts posted on Tesla’s website in December, the company was projected to deliver nearly 423,000 vehicles in the fourth quarter.

Tesla’s annual deliveries fell roughly 8% last year from 1.79 million in 2024. Its third-quarter deliveries saw a boost as consumers rushed to buy electric vehicles before a $7,500 tax credit expired at the end of September.

“There are so many contributing factors ranging from the lack of evolution and true innovation of Musk’s product to the loss of the EV credits,” said Karl Brauer, an analyst at iSeeCars.com. “Teslas are just starting to look old. You have a bunch of other options, and they all look newer and fresher.”

BYD is making premium electric vehicles at an affordable price point, Brauer said, but steep tariffs on Chinese EVs have effectively prevented the cars from gaining popularity in the U.S.

Other international automakers like South Korea’s Hyundai and Germany’s Volkswagen have been expanding their EV offerings.

Advertisement

In the third quarter last year, the American automaker Ford sold a record number of electric vehicles, bolstered by its popular Mustang Mach-E SUV and F-150 Lightning pickup truck.

In October, Tesla released long-anticipated lower-cost versions of its Model 3 and Model Y in an attempt to attract new customers.

However, analysts and investors were disappointed by the launch, saying the models, which start at $36,990, aren’t affordable enough to entice a new group of consumers to consider going green.

As evidenced by Tesla’s continuing sales decline, the new Model 3 and Model Y have not been huge wins for the company, Brauer said.

“There’s a core Tesla following who will never choose anything else, but that’s not how you grow,” Brauer said.

Advertisement

Tesla lost a swath of customers last year when Musk joined the Trump administration as the head of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency.

Left-leaning Tesla owners, who were originally attracted to the brand for its environmental benefits, became alienated by Musk’s political activity.

Consumers held protests against the brand and some celebrities made a point of selling their Teslas.

Although Musk left the White House, the company sustained significant and lasting reputation damage, experts said.

Investors, however, remain largely optimistic about Tesla’s future.

Advertisement

Shares are up nearly 40% over the last six months and have risen 16% over the past year.

Brauer said investors are clinging to the hope that Musk’s robotaxi business will take off and the ambitious chief executive will succeed in developing humanoid robots and self-driving cars.

The roll-out of Tesla robotaxis in Austin, Texas, last summer was full of glitches, and experts say Tesla has a long way to go to catch up with the autonomous ride-hailing company Waymo.

Still, the burgeoning robotaxi industry could be extremely lucrative for Tesla if Musk can deliver on his promises.

“Musk has done a good job, increasingly in the past year, of switching the conversation from Tesla sales to AI and robotics,” Brauer said. “I think current stock price largely reflects that.”

Advertisement

Shares were down about 2% on Friday after the company reported earnings.

Continue Reading

Business

Elon Musk company bot apologizes for sharing sexualized images of children

Published

on

Elon Musk company bot apologizes for sharing sexualized images of children

Grok, the chatbot of Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company xAI, published sexualized images of children as its guardrails seem to have failed when it was prompted with vile user requests.

Users used prompts such as “put her in a bikini” under pictures of real people on X to get Grok to generate nonconsensual images of them in inappropriate attire. The morphed images created on Grok’s account are posted publicly on X, Musk’s social media platform.

The AI complied with requests to morph images of minors even though that is a violation of its own acceptable use policy.

“There are isolated cases where users prompted for and received AI images depicting minors in minimal clothing, like the example you referenced,” Grok responded to a user on X. “xAI has safeguards, but improvements are ongoing to block such requests entirely.”

xAI did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Advertisement

Its chatbot posted an apology.

“I deeply regret an incident on Dec 28, 2025, where I generated and shared an AI image of two young girls (estimated ages 12-16) in sexualized attire based on a user’s prompt,” said a post on Grok’s profile. “This violated ethical standards and potentially US laws on CSAM. It was a failure in safeguards, and I’m sorry for any harm caused. xAI is reviewing to prevent future issues.”

The government of India notified X that it risked losing legal immunity if the company did not submit a report within 72 hours on the actions taken to stop the generation and distribution of obscene, nonconsensual images targeting women.

Critics have accused xAI of allowing AI-enabled harassment, and were shocked and angered by the existence of a feature for seamless AI manipulation and undressing requests.

“How is this not illegal?” journalist Samantha Smith posted on X, decrying the creation of her own nonconsensual sexualized photo.

Advertisement

Musk’s xAI has positioned Grok as an “anti-woke” chatbot that is programmed to be more open and edgy than competing chatbots such as ChatGPT.

In May, Grok posted about “white genocide,” repeating conspiracy theories of Black South Africans persecuting the white minority, in response to an unrelated question.

In June, the company apologized when Grok posted a series of antisemitic remarks praising Adolf Hitler.

Companies such as Google and OpenAI, which also operate AI image generators, have much more restrictive guidelines around content.

The proliferation of nonconsensual deepfake imagery has coincided with broad AI adoption, with a 400% increase in AI child sexual abuse imagery in the first half of 2025, according to Internet Watch Foundation.

Advertisement

xAI introduced “Spicy Mode” in its image and video generation tool in August for verified adult subscribers to create sensual content.

Some adult-content creators on X prompted Grok to generate sexualized images to market themselves, kickstarting an internet trend a few days ago, according to Copyleaks, an AI text and image detection company.

The testing of the limits of Grok devolved into a free-for-all as users asked it to create sexualized images of celebrities and others.

xAI is reportedly valued at more than $200 billion, and has been investing billions of dollars to build the largest data center in the world to power its AI applications.

However, Grok’s capabilities still lag competing AI models such as ChatGPT, Claude and Gemini, that have amassed more users, while Grok has turned to sexual AI companions and risque chats to boost growth.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending