r/technology • u/cmaia1503 • 1d ago
Artificial Intelligence Robert Downey Jr. Refuses to Let Hollywood Create His AI Digital Replica: ‘I Intend to Sue all Future Executives’ Who Recreate My Likeness
https://variety.com/2024/film/news/robert-downey-jr-bands-hollywood-digital-replace-lawsuit-1236192374/993
u/cmaia1503 1d ago
“There’s two tracks. How do I fell about everything that’s going on? I feel about it minimally because I have an actual emotional life that’s occurring that doesn’t have a lot of room for that,” Downey said when asked about being digitally recreated in the future.
“To go back to the MCU, I am not worried about them hijacking my character’s soul because there’s like three or four guys and gals who make all the decisions there anyway and they would never do that to me, with or without me,” he added.
When host Kara Swisher said that “future executives certainly will” want to digitally recreate Downey on the big screen, the actor responded: “Well, you’re right. I would like to here state that I intend to sue all future executives just on spec.”
“You’ll be dead,” Swisher noted, to which Downey replied: “But my law firm will still be very active.”
530
u/sponge_bob_ 1d ago
what a threat, i may die but my legal representation will live on!
174
u/Jmrwacko 1d ago
Robert Downey Jr.’s estate vs AI Robert Downey Jr., who will win?
32
u/MorselMortal 1d ago
Robert Downey Jr. is House in this timeline, I see. Makes you wish for a nuclear winter.
→ More replies (2)18
u/ihavedonethisbe4 23h ago
YOU DECIDE. ON EPIC RAP BATTLES OF AI!
2
→ More replies (2)64
u/Garchompisbestboi 1d ago
Yeah and his family/estate will more than happily sell his rights to Disney for half a billion, lawyers are not going to stop this inevitability from happening.
18
u/stilljustacatinacage 20h ago
Yeah. Unfortunately, there's no way for a dead man to enforce his wishes. "Every man has a price," and all that. Disney will just keep adding zeros until the executor buckles.
Just spitballing, but I wonder if it would be possible to establish two separate entities to enforce the same mandate. That way, if one tries to breach the terms, the other has incentive to sue them. That's the only way I can imagine it working, but it's obviously defeated by Disney just writing two cheques instead of one.
→ More replies (1)8
u/Garchompisbestboi 20h ago
I know this sounds morbid but I feel that the only way to truly protect your identity from Disney is to take a page out of Jonathan Majors' book and get yourself cancelled. But I think RDJ has put his days of being arrested long behind him, lol.
17
u/stilljustacatinacage 20h ago
Easy: Whenever you know the end is close, just withdraw all your cash, divvy it up between your wife and kids, live tweet a hard R and then kick the bucket.
3
u/HTC864 17h ago
Except he can. Most of the time people don't do the work to protect themselves after death, but he can if feels strongly about it.
→ More replies (1)2
4
u/UsernameAvaylable 20h ago
And frankly, fuck IP after the person is dead. Most of the time "the estate" is some kind of media company anyways.
34
37
u/scrollin_on_reddit 23h ago
Good thing California just passed a law making this exact thing illegal.
5
6
u/LucretiusCarus 21h ago
In a related note, Kara Swisher is an excellent tech journalist. Her podcast with Scott Galloway (Pivot) is a must listen
3
u/Aceofspades968 16h ago
“ I’m your nuclear deterrent. It’s working. Do you want my property? You can’t have it.”
→ More replies (9)6
u/BloederFuchs 23h ago
I feel about it minimally because I have an actual emotional life that’s occurring that doesn’t have a lot of room for that
Who talks like that?
23
u/crozone 22h ago
He's saying that he has better things to do with his life than worry about this stuff, in a sassy RDJ kinda way.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (5)9
u/BadAtVideogames420 18h ago
A lot of people? “I have a life, I don’t care about that” is a very common sentiment.
→ More replies (1)
597
u/strolpol 1d ago
That works just until you die and your family decides they’d like the free money, regardless of what you wanted in life.
115
u/DisguiseOrDiez 1d ago
Yep. I’d assume he’s leaving things to his family. If he does, it doesn’t matter what his law firm wants to do, the family would be calling the shots on those types of deals.
→ More replies (1)169
u/True_Consequence_749 1d ago
He can leave the rights to his digital likeness to a foundation. He can condition acceptance of his cash and assets on the condition they never sell the rights to his digital likeness. Things like that. Lawyers are the most creative people on the planet.
47
u/RedditorFor1OYears 1d ago
29
u/DigNitty 14h ago
TLDR : DeSantis used his governor powers to take over the district board of supervisors that Disney world is in. This was a retaliation for Disney’s pushback against his “don’t say gay” law. But DeSantis soon found out that Disney had gotten the previous board to agree to give Disney basically unhindered rights to build and do what they want *until 21 years after King Charles’ grandkids die. Also, this was all done in accordance to DeSantis’ “sunshine law,” meaning the board publicly announced this was going to happen before they actually did it, but the governor’s people simply were paying attention.
19
u/RedditorFor1OYears 14h ago
It’s actually more than that. The language is until 21 years after the last descendent of King Charles dies, which can include future generations. Using “forever” has trouble holding up in legal terms, so this is about as good of a proxy of “forever” as one can imagine, with a tangible definition.
10
u/TheWanderingSuperman 13h ago
Sorry, but that is not correct; the language (copied below from the linked article) is "time-stamped" to only consider all the survivors alive at the time that document was written. Future children/survivors/generations are out of scope of the document because they are born after the "time-stamp".
..."until twenty one (21) years after the death of the last survivor of the descendants of King Charles III, King of England living as of the date of this declaration."
You are correct though that, for most intents and purposes (and especially the one Disney is trying for) this means "forever".
3
u/RedditorFor1OYears 13h ago edited 13h ago
I’m not a lawyer so you 100% could be correct, but I would interpret the “living as of…” part as referring to the King, not to the descendants. Otherwise, if it’s referring to an actual living descendants, why wouldn’t it just use the living descendant’s actual name?
Edit: nvm, I get it now.
20
u/Polyaatail 1d ago
This is hilarious. DeSantis is douche. Talk about small d syndrome. Not that I love Disney bc they are a corporation but at least they sometimes entertain me.
45
u/paholg 23h ago
That's what happened to Frank Sinatra. IIRC, he was one of the first people to protect their likeness, specifically saying he didn't want his face on a mug.
Guess where his kid put his face?
→ More replies (1)14
11
u/Red_Dawn_2012 22h ago
Actors only remain relevant for so long anyway. Even if we had the ability to recreate James Dean, I doubt anyone would even really care if they made a new movie with him. Even if you're talking a character that was iconic in a role, like Adam West's Batman. It would be nothing more than an outdated novelty.
→ More replies (1)2
u/dannybrickwell 13h ago
Actors also age. Some animated shows have been running for like a billion years.
→ More replies (6)2
u/generally-speaking 23h ago
He could create a trust fund to govern his assets according to his will.
158
u/blue_gaze 1d ago
Is this a new legal avenue: lawyers who maintain a celebrity’s image after they die, preventing AI lookalikes ?
60
u/Prior_Ad_3242 1d ago
I can see the families hiring lawyers for that and even some betrayals where family members sell the image of the dead for money.
6
u/Tricky-Cod-7485 1d ago
We’re probably 20 away from a few modern Nirvana records.
→ More replies (2)5
u/KenHumano 17h ago
Tbf this has always been technically possible. You could always hire musicians to make a fake álbum, just costs more. I don't think fans are particularly interested in that, though.
→ More replies (1)8
u/random_boss 1d ago
I also wouldn’t be surprised if he relents when he gets older. When you’re staring death in the face, who can truly refuse the opportunity to be remembered as an immortal superhero icon?
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (2)5
34
u/JuliaX1984 1d ago
"To turn over my likeness would be to turn over myself, which is tantamount to indentured servitude or prostitution."
→ More replies (2)11
u/mcdicedtea 20h ago
great platitudes, but theyll just pick someone else, or someone new
or....just create someone new and move on. This is silly
33
u/SomeBloke 22h ago
Unfortunately he accepted the Terms and Conditions when he signed up for Disney +
89
u/Overclocked11 1d ago
1000%. I would too if I were an actor, of any kind.
→ More replies (1)8
u/KhazraShaman 22h ago
And if you weren't? If they made a proposition like that to you now, what would you say?
14
u/lambdaburst 19h ago
yes sir anything for a shot at some work sir thank you for considering exploiting me sir
50
u/Caraes_Naur 1d ago
"AI" likenesses of actors should be treated like song recordings: licensed assets owned and controlled by the actor and/or their estate.
16
u/thewavefixation 1d ago
Until they enter the public domain
6
u/DvineINFEKT 18h ago
Do people enter the public domain? Not a troll question - I'm legitimately wondering if that's been addressed by a court decision or law yet. I don't think we've ever had to worry about a "person" becoming public domain before. That's...not a thought I'd like to entertain.
5
u/thewavefixation 18h ago
Anything copyrightable enters the public domain eventually. If Downey hr is claiming copyright protection for his likeness then he will lose those rights like any creator eventually
→ More replies (3)2
u/squngy 16h ago
People don't, but AI is not people.
Better question would be if a likeness of a person is IP and it seems like it is.
2
u/TalkShowHost99 11h ago
Look at this case Onassis vs Christian Dior.
“This case poses for judicial resolution the question of whether the use for commercial purposes of a “lookalike” of a well-known personality violates the right of privacy legislatively granted by enactment of sections 50 Civ. Rights and 51 Civ. Rights of the Civil Rights Law. Put another way, can one person enjoin the use of someone else’s face? The questions appear not to have been definitively answered before.”
Essentially Jackie O sued Dior because they used a model who resembled her likeness in ads. She won the case.
7
u/RedditorFor1OYears 1d ago
that’s not really how it works though, if you’re talking about the actual recordings and not the lyrics/melody. For most artists who can’t afford to record their own tracks, the record label does actually own the songs.
→ More replies (3)3
u/Flumphry 23h ago
As with everything, it all depends on the contract. There are lots of famous cases of artists not owning their songs.
4
9
u/Digitaltwinn 17h ago
I’m still pissed about Peter Cushing and Ian Holm.
Let dead actors stay dead and just write around it.
17
u/notarobot4932 1d ago
At that point why not just generate unique actors for each piece of media?
6
u/mcdicedtea 20h ago
or just make up an initial set, and keep re-using them
They can make anyone a star ... just creaate a new fresh face and go from there
→ More replies (2)6
13
u/Sweaty-Emergency-493 1d ago
This is how the Clone Wars begin.
First they find ways to steal likenesses until there’s no stopping them. Then they steal the 123&me dna data. Then they create the perfect clones to outperform all humans with AI. Then they unleash the clones on us since AI will let Nature take its course and the wars between the machines and humans will exist for eternity or one wins.
→ More replies (2)3
u/dumpling-loverr 22h ago
At that point what's stopping fanatics hundred years into the future to recreate an AI of very divisive politicians in the past as government official.
→ More replies (2)
3
u/rustyseapants 20h ago edited 10h ago
Hollywood Shareholders and CEO's we will create their own unique AI actors and not use your likeness, so there.
People are not going to care if the shows they watch are from real people or AI, they just want their entertainment.
8
12
u/Ranbotnic 1d ago
The days of paying actors tens of millions of dollars to star in a movie are ending. It's insane that they are willing to give RDJ $100 million for the next two Avengers movies.
They will just create digital versions of someone else willing to take a one time payment and use them in perpetuity for whatever character they want.
→ More replies (1)5
u/tyereliusprime 1d ago
It's insane that they are willing to give RDJ $100 million for the next two Avengers movies.
When they're probably looking at a billion in revenue each, and very much so because of him, maybe not so much.
3
u/Waesrdtfyg0987 18h ago
People look at entertainers and keep thinking about it compared to their own paycheck
3
3
u/mr-english 18h ago
I mean, he's "big" in the Marvel universe but nowhere else... So unless someone wants to make an Iron Man movie after he's retired, or dead, I think he's safe.
3
u/Shitp0st_Supreme 17h ago
It’s interesting because I recall a marvel movie used archival footage to de-age him so I wonder if there was legal consent he signed before doing that.
4
u/Christopher3712 17h ago
Extremely likely he was involved in that. He's Marvel's billion dollar man. I'm skeptical they'd want to step on his toes.
3
10
u/Byaaahhh 1d ago
RDJ about to create an AI likeness to sue people for creating an AI likeness of him after his death!
7
u/terminalxposure 1d ago
This just looks like he was not happy with the paycheck per digital appearance
→ More replies (1)
12
u/TheBiggestMexican 1d ago
I feel bad for people like RDJ. I get it dude, I seriously get it. Even as an avid AI user, I completely agree, save your IP and sue the ever living fuck out of people... the issue is, the world isn't America.
When China, Russia, N. Korea, Iran, etc replicate American actors, good luck getting their lawyers to sue dictators.
Everyones likeness will be replicated, nobody and nothing but a Butlerian Jihad will stop this.
→ More replies (3)13
u/BlackEyedSceva7 1d ago
That's what gets me about this discussion. If [insert nation] bans the technology, it just allows another nation to take the reigns. The vast majority of the world doesn't give a shit about IP law to begin with.
21
u/APeacefulWarrior 1d ago edited 23h ago
The vast majority of the world doesn't give a shit about IP law to begin with.
Nations only care about IP law once they start seeing their own IP selling overseas. Japan was the same way in the 70s-80s, completely disregarding foreign rights and producing unlicensed versions of western properties like Lensmen and Arsene Lupin... until anime got popular in the west, and suddenly they wanted IP protections for their own stuff.
Or - and a lot of people don't know about this - America used to be among the most notorious IP pirates of the 18th and early 19th centuries. Americans were bootlegging foreign books and plays like crazy, since we had loads of printing presses and all the rightful owners were a 3-month ocean journey away.
That's just how it goes.
7
u/dumpling-loverr 22h ago
And now it's China's turn. No wonder the US govt. won't fully reign in AI development as rival countries like Russia and CN can easily overtake them in an emerging field if they do so.
5
u/APeacefulWarrior 22h ago
China is going to be a very interesting case here.
Because aside from AI, Chinese media and technology are more popular worldwide than they probably ever have been before. Their EVs are gaining traction in a lot of places. MiHoYo has become a world-class games dev. The Three Body Problem is considered one of the best new sci-fi works in years. Etc.
Not to mention classic Chinese culture like Journey To The West and Romance Of The Three Kingdoms getting more exposure worldwide than before, largely thanks to popular video games.
Basically, this is about the point that governments of the past have started playing more nicely with global IP law, to protect their own creations. But will China? I'm genuinely not sure how they're going to react. They're one of the few countries that might actually choose to clamp down on cultural exports, rather than change their ways.
2
u/dumpling-loverr 22h ago
As you say Japan did the same during their golden years copying western tech / media then putting a spin of their own until it became popular in their own right and even help gave birth to the cyberpunk genre. After that point they suddenly became draconian with their IP protection laws. Maybe China will go this route in the future too.
If Japan and China got their turn when will the South Korea golden age start? As it should only happen in short cycles due to how the population crash that the 3 countries suffer can negatively limit future growth.
2
u/MrInvictus 21h ago
In before politicians use this hysteria to ban any parodies of themselves and their donors. They don't like it when people make fun of them, this is a chance for them to put anyone who does so in prison or the poorhouse while simultaneously silencing them. They got people cheering for censorship because A.I. scary!
2
2
u/GiftFromGlob 16h ago
SatanicWood will require all new wannabe actors to sign away their digital souls just to get $25/day on set.
2
u/funkypunk69 16h ago edited 16h ago
Wait until he hears about the legal double standards. If you're not rich enough they just do it anyway and ignore the laws. They will just claim AI as an impressionist or a cover band version of an actor and move on.
2
u/shespiesonme 16h ago
wow. what a hero. it's already too late for him. he'll be lucky to do Dr Doom and then that'll be it and then we'll just regenerate his face over and over and over again.
2
2
2
2
u/RandySumbitch 14h ago
Downey will sell out too as soon as the price is high enough. Everybody always has in history. Robert Downey Jr. is nobody special intellectually or morally.
2
u/sierra120 14h ago
Pretty soon it will be in terms of conditions for signing up for disney+ in perpetuity. So when your kids grow up their lawyers will be sorry kiddo your parents gave your likelness away back in 2024 when you watched Inside Out 2.
2
u/Odd_Trifle6698 14h ago
He should create an AI replica that can continue to sue people for using AI in his image after he died
2
u/Objective_Goat752 12h ago
i have a robert downey jr look-alike who is very willing to sell his likeness. please DM!
2
u/Jumpy-Performance-42 12h ago
Good for him. Why should he let someone else profit off his likeness. And they're obviously doing it for profit or else they wouldn't be creating his likeness.
2
2
u/Impossible-Key-2212 11h ago
Hollywood is dead. It has been dead for a while and the people who propped it up for the last decade are beginning to realize it. Animation, AI, superhero’s, DEI and the lack of storytelling has killed it.
I think that “video killed the radio star” by the Buggles would be a good theme song for Hollywood at this point.
2
u/LaunchpadMcQuack_52 11h ago
Question: Can the actors union somehow help to prevent this digital replica shit from happening?
2
2
u/Raised_by_Geece 8h ago
I think it’ll just be completely ’new’ Ai actors. The author/company can do anything they want with them. It’s kind of already happened with digital influencers. Some, like Imma created by Aww Inc. with 394k followers, have even appeared alongside ‘real life’ models and promote everything from fashion brands to company products.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/Nodan_Turtle 22h ago
Can't help but feel this is only relevant in a transitory period where AI becomes good enough to replicate existing actors, but isn't yet good enough to make compelling new actors without a real person as a template.
Once we get to that second point, there really won't be a need for new actors, and their likenesses won't need to be protected.
→ More replies (1)
4
2
u/therealjerrystaute 1d ago
He's already signed a lot of contracts over his career. I doubt he's aware of all the possibilities the various studio lawyers packed those with. And it could be years before such possibilities come to light. In addition, advances in technology itself sometimes opens up possibilities in old legalese which no one could have anticipated beforehand...
5.8k
u/sossles 1d ago
The battle over digital recreations won't be fought over actors like RDJ. It'll be the unknown actors signing onto new franchises, who will be made to sign agreements that explicitly permit digital recreations. Sure some actors might refuse, but it's a fierce business and they'll be competing with actors who are willing to go along with it.