A film that could put Netflix in trouble and show Hollywood's uncertain future

Footage of the controversy from the Netflix documentary titled 'What Jennifer Did'. (Netflix)

Netflix's latest true crime documentary, What did Jennifer do?Accused of using images created by Artificial intelligence. Released on April 10, the documentary revolves around Jennifer Bane, who is accused of plotting a cruel bounty against her own parents.

Revealed by Futurism, one of the problematic films can be seen in the trailer. The audience noticed this and other images in the 28th minute of the film. In it, Pan's high school friend describes her as “bubbly, happy, confident and very genuine”. There's a series of obvious photos associated with these words, but a closer look reveals suspicious details…

The picture in question shows Pan making a victory gesture, but if we look closely, we see something strange. His hands look like they're straight from the early days of Midjourney, an AI that creates images but mostly can't 'shape' hands and fingers.

It's hard to distinguish between AI and photography these days, but this case seems stark. In addition, the viewer's investigation revealed two other photos of Pan wearing the same red dress, which also showed signs of being manipulated by AI. While the exact editing process is unclear, experts suggest that the producers may have used a raw image to create additional “photos” using AI.

The details of the fingers in the controversial image in the documentary have raised suspicions that the footage was created with AI.  (Netflix)The details of the fingers in the controversial image in the documentary have raised suspicions that the footage was created with AI.  (Netflix)

The details of the fingers in the controversial image in the documentary have raised suspicions that the footage was created with AI. (Netflix)

Of course, this is something paradoxical… or something very dangerous. Using manipulated images in a documentary raises serious ethical issues. Gender True crime It thrives on the presentation of a fact-based story, and images play an important role in the story. When these images are blatantly altered, they completely undermine the credibility of the documentary and the platform that hosts it. This can skew the viewer's view of the case, creating bias and misconceptions.

See also  Lucia Montes condemned Cர்டrdoba de Molina for sexual harassment

Netflix has so far remained silent on the allegations. Unfortunately, this isn't the first time they've been criticized for using AI imagery in a movie, but the problem is that this movie is supposed to depict real events and people.

What future awaits us?

Regulatory bodies in the United States, Europe, and other countries have enacted laws governing the use of AI, but so far there do not appear to be specific laws governing the use of AI images or videos in documentaries or other content.

We already know that AI can write entire scripts, create music, and create images from written commands. Here's the next logical evolution: you can create realistic video content by writing a description of what you want. There are many sites that do this, which you can easily find by searching for “text to video”.

It won't be long before these sites turn entire scripts into movies full of music, characters and dialogue. This development will have a profound impact on employment in Hollywood. Experts predict that in five years the cost of making a movie will drop to 10% of the current cost.And that means lots of people looking for new jobs and empty studios.

Lawsuits against AI companies alleging copyright infringement are on the rise input (copy to upload to AI) or to publication (output generated by AI) or both. To date, departure cases based on the theory of “my work has to be somewhere” have lost where there is no significant similarity to the original work, but courts have given hope to the plaintiff's entry as the owner of the copyrighted work uploaded to AI.

See also  Belinda: What do her parents do? Belinda Schulz | Ignacio Peregrin | Celebrities from Mexico | nnda-nnlt | Performances

To avoid lawsuits, some AI companies have filed upfront to license libraries of content. Proposals to amend the Intellectual Property Act Compulsory licenses should be required with compulsory fees, as is done with music recordings.

Given AI's tendency to “hallucinate,” it's no surprise that it has reported disgustingly false facts about real people, leading to defamation lawsuits against AI companies. In January, A court rejected a claim To reject such case, so AI can take responsibility for such cases. It remains to be seen whether courts will apply Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act to AI-generated results as a defense to defamation lawsuits.

To date, a patchwork of state statutes and conflicting case law have hindered the right to ad litem cases against AI. However, intensive applications such as President Biden's AI-Generated Phone Calls The New Hampshire primary and Taylor Swift's advice to people not to vote on X videos have given new impetus to pending federal legislation that would protect image rights from AI and potentially block what Netflix could have done with her documentary.

Additional news that may interest you:

In the video | Apple to redesign Mac line with AI-powered chips

Gillian Patton

"Tv aficionado. Lifelong communicator. Travel ninja. Hardcore web buff. Typical music geek."

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top