>As I understand it, the WGA is very open to _writers_ using AI to help them in their work I can't actually find a direct quotation of them actually saying the

>As I understand it, the WGA is very open to _writers_ using AI to help them in their work I can't actually find a direct quotation of them actually saying they're open to this. Whereas I can find a direct quote of them saying "AI can’t be used as source material, to create MBA-covered writing or rewrite MBA-covered work, and AI-generated text cannot be considered in determining writing credits." I also fail to see how a random studio executive who writes up a draft using an AI and hands it off to a professional writer to cleanup, isn't themselves a writer. It's also already possible to just hire some random person off the street, have them draft up a screenplay based on what an executive says, have them give up their copyright, and send it off to a writer for "Adaption". The only truly novel thing about AI is that it's cheaper and it's possible to produce creative works which are not copyrightable in the first place using AI, and if the contractual implications of this are the specific concern, the WGA should be far more narrow with their proclamations. Also what they say on twitter: "[AIs] output is not eligible for copyright protection, nor can an AI software program sign a certificate of authorship." Is literally wrong." Is not literally true, it's possible to produce both uncopyrightable or copyrightable work with an AI: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/03/16/2023-05321/copyright-registration-guidance-works-containing-material-generated-by-artificial-intelligence https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/03/16/2023-05...