Don't Count AI-Generated Content as CanCon, CRTC Hears
The CRTC should not classify material generated by artificial intelligence as Canadian content, unions representing actors and writers told the regulator Thursday.
The Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists said that 'under no circumstance' should AI-created material be considered CanCon.
'Otherwise, it is a betrayal to our performers, who have already seen their moral rights violated and job opportunities limited by AI,' national president Eleanor Noble said.
The actors' union appeared at a two-week hearing held by the federal broadcast regulator to consider how to modernize its definition of Canadian content. The CRTC had asked for input on the impact and role of artificial intelligence as part of that process.
Noble said AI is widely used in dubbing and urged the CRTC to 'protect the livelihoods of Canadian performers.'
Marie Kelly, the organization's national executive director, said there are appropriate uses of AI, such as employing the technology to make a stunt look more dramatic while keeping the performer safe.
Related Stories
5/20/2025
5/14/2025
'But we are opposed to where the AI is generating performances,' she said.
Kelly said AI 'should not take over the jobs of the creators in the ecosystem that we're in and we should not treat AI-generated performers as if they are a Canadian actor.'
The Writers Guild of Canada, which appeared at the hearing Wednesday, also argued AI-generated content should not be considered Canadian content.
The CRTC's definition of Canadian content is based on awarding points when Canadians occupy key creative positions in a production. It's considering keeping that system and expanding it to allow more creative positions to count toward the total points.
The writers' union said in its written submission that AI isn't consistent with that approach. 'Machines do not have citizenship. They do not live and reside in Canada, nor any other national jurisdiction, because they do not 'live' or 'reside,'' it said.
The group argued the use of AI systems by a Canadian doesn't make the output Canadian either.
'Prompting a generative AI is not the same as creating content. It is fundamentally and overwhelmingly the AI technology that generates the output, not the human being inputting the prompts,' its submission said.
Crediting the AI user with the AI's output, the group said, would be like 'crediting the Sistine Chapel ceiling to Pope Julius II, because he commissioned its painting, rather than Michelangelo, who actually envisioned and painted it.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'We Are F**ked!: John Oliver Wades Through 'The S**t' We're Now 'Drowning In'
'Last Week Tonight' host John Oliver on Sunday sounded the alarm over the rapid rise of artificial intelligence-generated content that is increasingly appearing online. At one point, he summed it up: 'We are fucked!' Oliver explained how the explosion of new AI tools has made it easier than ever to produce so-called 'AI slop,' the low-quality music, images, videos and even news articles that are now dominating people's social media feeds. It's 'the newest iteration of spam' and is making some platforms 'unusable' because of their sheer volume, Oliver lamented. Many users don't realize the content isn't even real and 'bad actors' are also seizing on some of it, he added, pointing to when then-presidential candidate Donald Trump last year falsely dismissed photos of big crowds at a Kamala Harris campaing event as being AI-generated. 'We're going to be drowning in this shit for the foreseeable future,' Oliver warned. The comedian acknowledged there's no easy fix. AI models are often trained on the work of real-life creators, effectively ripping them off, he noted. He didn't offer a solution but did suggest 'a petty way' to seek revenge, by making genuine art by stealing from the slop. Find out how he did that here: Kayleigh McEnany's 'Every Dictator' Take On Trump Iran Strike Draws Online Fire Critics Point Out Glaring Contradiction In Trump's Iran 'Regime Change' Post JD Vance Roasted For Line That Inadvertently Seemed To Insult Trump Marjorie Taylor Greene Rages Against Trump Iran Strike With Chilling Warning
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Yahoo
Alyssa Chia elated to team with Hiroshi Abe for Japanese high-tech heist film
23 Jun - Alyssa Chia recently expressed elation to be a part of the Japanese movie, "Candlestick". The actress, who plays the role of a senior executive of a Taiwanese company in the movie, revealed during the premiere in Tokyo that the main reason she took the challenge was because no one has ever asked her to play this kind of villainous role before. "Another very important reason was that I was able to work with Japanese film king, Hiroshi Abe and that the film is about a highly complex AI financial fraud, which is very challenging," she said. On the other hand, Hiroshi, who also attended the premiere, said that the film has a lot of English dialogues in it, and that he is amazed by Alyssa's ability to digest the script so quickly and interpret it very well. "It's amazing. I look forward to working with her again," he confessed. Based on the novel "Soshikiri: FX Simulation Success Story" by Tetsuhiko Kawamura, "Candlestick" follows Nohara, a former genius white hat hacker who plots to deceive the impregnable AI that is the "guardian of the financial market" and make a fortune in the FX market after losing everything. It co-stars Nanao, Kenjiro Tsuda and Austin Lin among others. (Photo Source: Alyssa IG)
Yahoo
12 hours ago
- Yahoo
Disney and NBCUniversal's Midjourney Lawsuit Isn't About Money — It's About Setting AI Precedent
It isn't every day that individual artists and creators and mega-studio conglomerates are actually aligned in what they want, but that's just the sort of villain that artificial intelligence has become when it comes to the entertainment sphere. Last week, both Disney and NBCUniversal sued AI company Midjourney in a case of copyright infringement. For several years, there have been countless lawsuits filed by individuals against companies such as Midjourney objecting to the use of copyrighted material in the training of AI models and in these models' outputs. But two major studios teaming up to sue one of the bigger AI image generation tools for the same reason is a big step. More from IndieWire New York Indian Film Festival Highlights Include Shyam Benegal and James Ivory Tributes: What to See Screen Talk Previews '28 Years Later' at the Box Office - and Fall Festival Hopefuls Before we start holding up any studio as a defender of artists' rights, there's a very good chance that how this lawsuit ultimately plays out will inform Disney, NBCUni, and other studios' own playbooks in building their own AI models. For now, the Midjourney suit has the potential to set a precedent around artificial intelligence, how AI companies can operate or train their models, and have an impact on all creatives. 'It's going to be an important case that'll affect the rights held by almost all creatives, regardless of how large they are,' said Ray Seilie, a trial attorney with Kinsella Holley Iser Kump Steinsapir. 'It's a rare alliance in the legal industry, or the entertainment legal industry, where you see studios actually doing something that artists are 100 percent behind.' The 143-page lawsuit against Midjourney filed last Wednesday is a simple copyright lawsuit, even if it comes at the intersection of AI and bigger legal debates about whether AI-generated material can be considered copyrightable. Disney and NBCUniversal allege that Midjourney is willfully infringing on their biggest characters and IP and making a profit from doing it. It claims that anyone with a subscription to use Midjourney's image generating tool — and soon its video generation tool — can prompt the AI model to create an image of Darth Vader or the Minions, and it will spit out an almost perfect copy. The lawsuit includes some convincing side-by-sides of the real movie stills and the images Midjourney has created. It's not as if those examples are a close facsimile that can be mistaken for something else, they're not a parody, and they're not a transformed iteration of existing characters; it's just an AI-generated copy. That's going to be a problem when Midjourney — which has yet to file a response to the complaint — tries to say it's just fair use. 'Just candidly, I think it is hard to see how the courts will let Midjourney keep doing what it's doing without any kind of restriction,' Seilie said. 'To me, I think the studios have a very strong case here.' Seilie said Midjourney will likely try to say that it is just the middleman providing the tools, and it's the users creating the images who are violating the copyright and are breaking the terms of service. That is a stretch, since Midjourney profits off subscriptions and controls what its users can and can't do. Case in point: the lawsuit says Disney and NBCUniversal tried to get Midjourney to restrict users from creating images of copyrighted material, but it has ignored those pleas. Midjourney already prevents users from generating images of a violent or sexual nature, so why can't they just flip another switch to keep people from generating Yoda? 'Legally speaking, it's clear that Midjourney is willfully infringing. They're intentionally infringing, and it sounds like they didn't take any steps to try to mitigate or limit what the users could do on their platform,' said entertainment attorney Dale Nelson, who works with Donaldson Callif Perez and is former in-house counsel for Warner Bros. 'And willful infringement is far worse than infringement of the type where you have a good faith belief that what you were doing was okay. So the fact that they didn't respond to the studios' letters just doesn't look good for Midjourney.' Nelson said Midjourney may also argue that any ruling against them could have unintended consequences on the whole industry and what AI models are able to do. But the studios' lawyers have thought of that too. 'I think that they have made very specific factual allegations in their complaint, probably wisely so, that it's not a lawsuit just about all AI. This is a very specific use that they're complaining about,' Nelson said. All this matters to Disney and NBCUni because it represents lost revenue. If someone can just generate an image with AI of their favorite 'Star Wars' character, why would they want to buy anything specific from Disney itself? It could also be damaging to Disney's brand if AI can easily generate images of Disney characters that are more adult in nature than they'd prefer and let the average user distribute that image widely on the web. Seilie said this could be a very narrow ruling, one that only impacts Midjourney and how it operates or needs to operate moving forward, but more likely, any ruling will cause other AI companies to be proactive and change what their models can do or how they're trained based on what the court decides. They don't want their own lawsuits if they can avoid them. It could also just be settled with Midjourney agreeing to pay Disney and NBCUniversal a licensing fee to keep creating copies of their IP. But Seilie expects this to go deeper and believes the studios will want a ruling of some kind — and will fight until they get one. Seilie believes Disney and NBCUniversal will want discovery with the ability to get a clear sense of exactly how Midjourney's models were trained and how they're used. 'The studios want the precedent here,' Seilie said. 'They want a district court opinion that says that scraping data for a training engine or using copyrighted material in training data is a copyright violation. I think they're gonna want a ruling that says that, and it'll probably go through appeals.' Precedent is the crux of the issue here, giving the studios clarity on exactly what can and can't be used in training AI models, whether it's licensing someone else's to make movies or training their own internally. Because the flip side, should the courts rule in favor of Midjourney, could be 'earth shaking' for how the studios do business. 'It would be a sea change in the way that copyrighted material works,' Seilie said. 'We would see a lot of changes in how studios operate or how creatives, frankly, operate.' Best of IndieWire Guillermo del Toro's Favorite Movies: 56 Films the Director Wants You to See 'Song of the South': 14 Things to Know About Disney's Most Controversial Movie Nicolas Winding Refn's Favorite Films: 37 Movies the Director Wants You to See
