The SAG-AFTRA union continues to be at odds with game publishers over the role of artificial intelligence in acting, and it’s clear that reaching a consensus is still a long way off.
The union recently updated its members via its website, acknowledging that while there have been some positive developments and a few agreements reached, there’s still a significant divide, particularly concerning AI issues. Since July 2024, those involved in the gaming sector have been on strike, primarily to address these concerns.
The heart of the matter lies in how AI is used—specifically, the idea that some publishers are pushing to create digital replicas of an actor’s voice. This would allow their voice to be reused without the actor’s knowledge or consent.
SAG-AFTRA expressed frustration over the perception that an agreement is near: “The bargaining group would like you to think we’re close to finalizing a deal.”
However, that’s not accurate. The union believes there’s an attempt to drive a wedge among members. They’re urging everyone to examine a detailed comparison chart that highlights just how significant the disparities still are on essential AI protections for performers.
The statement continued to outline their concerns: Publishers want the freedom to utilize past performances and any they can obtain outside of current contracts while completely sidestepping negotiated protections. There’s a risk that actors might not be informed about the usage of their digital replicas, receive no payment, and retain no control over these uses. Alarmingly, these replicas could even be utilized during future strikes, regardless of the actor’s stance. Once consent is granted for specific uses, publishers might withhold information on what actually transpires with those digital versions.
Despite these challenges with the bargaining group, SAG-AFTRA has achieved notable success elsewhere. Over 160 games have joined their interim and independent agreements, with revenues from these projects surpassing those of non-striking games. These agreements incorporate the protections they’re advocating for with the bargaining group, demonstrating that such terms are indeed possible and appealing to a wide range of gaming companies. However, resistance remains from the primary bargaining entities.
