Studios, lawmakers and artists push back on AI’s IP grab

Who Owns AI Entertainment?

The rise of generative AI technologies across film, television, and music has triggered a fierce backlash from studios, artists, and lawmakers worldwide. What began as alarm over the unauthorized remixing of copyrighted works, celebrity likenesses, and franchises has escalated into coordinated enforcement efforts, evolving legal frameworks, and technical countermeasures aimed at reigning in AI’s expanding footprint on intellectual property (IP).

From Alarm to Enforcement: Industry Pushback Intensifies

Hollywood studios, trade unions, and rights-holders have moved decisively from warning to action in response to AI tools that repurpose protected content without authorization. Key developments include:

Cease-and-desist letters and public censures: Major studios have sent formal legal notices targeting AI platforms and developers that use their IP without permission. For example, companies like Disney have actively pressured platforms such as ByteDance to block unauthorized AI-generated content featuring their franchises and celebrity likenesses.
Union and trade group involvement: Unions representing actors, musicians, and other creatives are not only condemning AI video and music tools but also advising members on potential contractual breaches and likeness rights infringements related to AI use.
Platform cooperation and resistance: While some platforms have pledged to tighten controls on AI-generated content stemming from copyrighted materials, challenges persist, especially with emerging tools like Seedance 2.0, which continue to generate controversy due to their global reach and utilization of cinematic IP without clear licensing.

Legal and Legislative Responses Emerge

In parallel with industry enforcement, lawmakers and legal experts are crafting frameworks to address AI’s legal gray zones:

State legislation: Missouri’s proposed “Taylor Swift Act” exemplifies state-level efforts to protect performers’ images and likenesses from AI-enabled exploitation. This bill aims to create clearer rights around digital impersonation and unauthorized AI use of celebrity images.
Contractual and rights advisory: Lawyers specializing in entertainment law are increasingly cautioning productions about the risks AI poses to existing contracts, particularly regarding likeness rights and copyright ownership. The potential for AI-generated content to infringe on these agreements is prompting calls for updated clauses and clearer permissions.
Trade group guidance: Industry bodies are developing best practices and enforcement strategies to support creators and rights-holders in navigating AI-related IP challenges.

Technological and Defensive Measures

The industry is not only fighting AI on legal grounds but also investing in technological solutions:

Sony’s music-source-tracing technology: Sony has announced advancements in tools designed to trace the origins of AI-generated music, aiming to identify whether copyrighted compositions were used as training data or source material. This technology could prove pivotal in enforcing rights and licensing agreements in the music sector.
Platform-level restrictions: Following pressure from studios, platforms like ByteDance have committed to blocking AI-generated videos that infringe on Disney and other studios’ content. However, enforcement remains complex due to the rapid proliferation of AI tools and the global scale of digital content distribution.
Controversy around Seedance 2.0: Seedance 2.0, a Chinese-developed AI video tool, has emerged as a significant player in global cinema production by enabling the rapid creation and remixing of film content. While it promises innovation and efficiency, its use of copyrighted film elements without clear licensing has drawn intense scrutiny from rights-holders worldwide. The controversy highlights the challenges of regulating AI tools developed in jurisdictions with differing IP enforcement standards.

Global and Regulatory Concerns: Risks of Inequality and Revenue Loss

International bodies, including the United Nations, have issued warnings that without comprehensive rules and compensation frameworks, AI could exacerbate existing inequalities in the creative industries:

Risk of revenue stripping: Creators whose works train AI models may see diminished income if AI-generated content bypasses traditional licensing and royalty systems.
Deepening inequality: Smaller creators and independent artists may be disproportionately affected, lacking the resources to enforce rights or develop defensive technology.
Calls for global coordination: Policymakers and industry leaders emphasize the need for international cooperation to establish clear IP standards, transparency in AI training data usage, and equitable remuneration models.

Latest Developments: Seedance 2.0 and Increased Scrutiny of Chinese AI Tools

Recent reporting on Seedance 2.0 exposes the growing influence of Chinese AI video tools in reshaping global cinema production:

Seedance 2.0’s capabilities: The platform leverages advanced AI to rapidly generate cinematic sequences, integrate celebrity likenesses, and remix existing film content, offering unprecedented speed and cost-efficiency in production workflows.
Global impact and controversy: While Seedance 2.0 accelerates content creation, it raises thorny legal and ethical questions about IP rights, especially as it operates across borders where enforcement mechanisms vary. Rights-holders in the U.S. and Europe are increasingly scrutinizing such tools and demanding stronger safeguards.
Heightened regulatory attention: Governments and cultural bodies are monitoring the expansion of AI tools like Seedance 2.0, considering regulatory measures to protect domestic creative industries and uphold international IP agreements.

Conclusion: Navigating an Uncertain AI Frontier

The collision between generative AI and traditional intellectual property frameworks is reshaping the creative industries. Studios, unions, lawmakers, and tech companies are mobilizing a multi-pronged response—legal, technical, and legislative—to protect the rights and livelihoods of creators amid rapid technological change.

As AI tools like Seedance 2.0 push the boundaries of content creation while challenging existing IP norms, the industry faces urgent questions about how to balance innovation with respect for original works. The evolving landscape underscores the necessity for clear rules, robust enforcement, and fair compensation models to ensure AI serves as a tool for creativity rather than exploitation.

The coming months will be critical as new laws, technologies, and international collaborations seek to set the boundaries for AI’s role in film, music, and beyond. Without such frameworks, the risk remains that AI’s growth could deepen inequalities and erode the very industries it relies upon for training and inspiration.

Sources (13)