Blockchain Copyright -vs- AI
Could Blockchain technology be a solution to WGA's problems with AI?
As the WGA strike against the AMPTP persists, one thing has become crystal clear. AI is here, and it isn’t going away. For every day the strike continues, AI becomes exponentially better at mimicking writers’ creative skills which are necessary to write a Hollywood script for TV or movies. Are WGA writers striking themselves into obsolescence? AI never sleeps, never needs a break, never needs time to raise its children. It simply keeps recognizing patterns and mimicking them with greater efficiency…all the time.
In considering the WGA’s demands, the question arises whether or not writers are fighting for screenwriting’s viable future, or fighting to change things back to the way they once were in a not-so-distant past that sadly, might already be gone forever? Advancements in technology have permanently changed or eliminated many careers over the years. History tells us that often times the best defense against encroaching technological advancements is the reliance on other technological advancements to combat them. It’s a ‘fight-fire-with-fire’ approach. AI, meet Blockchain copyright technology.
According to multiple tech articles, blockchain technology is the future for copyrights. Blockchain is the trading and tracking framework for crypto currency like bitcoin. Coincidentally, it can also be used to track the usage of IP (Intellectual Property). My non-techy, layperson understanding is that blockchain keeps track of ‘blocks’ of data moving through cyberspace, which allows those data-blocks to be sold and traded as currency. “Blockchain technology can also theoretically help create a registry of unregistered IP rights, including the unregistered design rights and copyright, as it can effectively provide proof of the time of existence rights management information (if appropriate) and conditions for jurisdiction.”1
Once copyrights employ blockchain, or a similar technological tracking system, then in theory once an artists’ original work has been converted into blocks of data, that data would be trackable/traceable anywhere in cyberspace, including when it’s downloaded on a streaming platform. Imagine if each time a program (tv show or movie) is downloaded or streamed, an underlying blockchain copyright sends digital compensation directly to the holder(s) of said copyright, in much the same way fractional pieces of bitcoin are traded back and forth with ease and security.
In this imagined scenario, writers wouldn’t have to wait indefinitely for streamers to pay residuals or share their top-secret information on the amounts of actual viewership. A blockchain copyright could serve as a type of digital currency for artists and creators sending payments to fractional copyright holders each and every time their original work is consumed, and it could be set up to happen automatically, removing the ability for employers to stiff writers for payment. Instead of a crypto wallet, writers could have a sort of ‘crypto-residuals-wallet’ that receives payments each time content is streamed or consumed in any other manner, further alleviating AMPTP companies from the daunting burden of paying writers in a timely manner.
One problem. In order to use a blockchain copyright as a method of payment, writers would have to retain ownership (full or fractional) of their copyrights. I used to wonder why screen and television writers didn’t retain ownership of their copyrights as is typical for authors and playwrights. It’s the W to the G to the A. In order to unionize the members must be considered ‘employees’. People who own IP, content, or the underlying copyrights, are generally not considered ‘employees’. They are actual owners or producers of IP. It is for this reason that nearly all WGA deals are deemed ‘work-for-hire whether the writer created the script on spec or whether the production entity hires the writer to work on a project owned by said company. Either way television and film writers are deemed ‘employees’ on a WGA-sanctioned work-for-hire contract. I’m pretty sure that at the time the WGA was formed, it was in a writer’s best interests to give up ownership of their copyrights in order to legally be allowed to form a more perfect union.
However, given the way things have evolved over the years to a point where ‘content is king’, is it still in a writer’s best interest to sell all rights, including copyrights to companies that are having a hard time compensating writers at even a living wage? Even though I’m not a WGA member, I’m also not anti-WGA by any means. I’m thankful and have benefitted from the WGA’s collective bargaining despite not being a member. When I sold my first option way back in 2002, I was able to earn higher pay because the project was considered WGA even though I was not yet a member. Shortly thereafter, I became disabled, and my writing career was put on hold for a couple decades. Had that bit of misfortune not happened and my career continued to progress, I would have gladly joined the WGA as soon as possible. But given the way things have evolved, I am more hesitant to sell the copyright on a project I created from scratch out of the ethers so to speak.
Is it possible for the WGA to evolve into a new type of union where its members are able to retain ownership of their copyrights through some kind of legal loophole? If more and more writers elect to hold on to their copyrights essentially becoming ‘producers’, might there be a new sister organization to the WGA; a type of trade association for writers who choose to be content owners (i.e., producers) in addition to their work-for-hire writer status? It is a lot easier and more feasible for writers to become producers than the other way around. Afterall, no one knows a good story better than a writer.
Another potential benefit of blockchain copyrights is much stronger protection against AI’s plagiaristic tendencies. AI searches for patterns in the original work of actual writers and artists. Then AI mimics, or copies (for lack of a better term) those patterns creating something different but extremely similar to the original work. If copyrighted work is transferred into ‘data blocks’ (unique patterns) and those blocks show up in AI generated content, then a copyright strike can be levied triggering financial compensation for the copyright holder. In this way the use of AI would be less intrusive if the original writer/artist is attributed and compensated each time their work is used to ‘train’ AI. One word best describes the future of AI, blockchain, copyrights and the WGA…………….Evolution.
by,
Marlon G.
Speaking of blockchain, help secure your future by adding bitcoin to your portfolio.
https://www.analyticsinsight.net/how-can-blockchain-technology-reshape-the-world-of-copyright/#:~:text=The%20digital%20copyright%20data%20is%20contained%20in%20the,that%20the%20digital%20copyright%20i