Darth Vader, Fortnite, and AI walk into a bar… and by “bar” I mean a legal dispute. Last September, California passed a bill requiring companies to obtain consent before making AI replicas of deceased artists. You’d think plain old decency would have meant that practice was already in place, but it seems AI hasn’t been trained on the concept of decency yet. SAG-AFTRA was especially thrilled with the bill, after AI protections for actors was one of the key issues during the 2023 strike. So here’s a new wrinkle: last September we also lost the great James Earl Jones, who, amid a storied career, was the voice of Darth Vader. Turns out Jones bequeathed permission for studios “to use A.I.-backed recreations of his voice” posthumously, which is what Llama Productions recently did to use the signature Vader voice in their video game Fortnite. They received permission from his estate, so no problem, right? Wrong! SAG-AFTRA is none too pleased that they weren’t notified and given a chance to bargain on behalf of their members, so they’ve filed an unfair labor practice charge against Llama.
Llama, who are perhaps best known for their work on the hit gaming franchise Fortnite, has recently featured an A.I. recreation of James Earl Jones’ immortal Star Wars villain, Darth Vader, in their latest expansion. The A.I.-generated recreation of Jones’ voice was added to Fortnite with the express permission of the actor’s estate.
According to SAG-AFTRA’s charges, however, Llama Productions had failed to notify the actors’ union of the A.I.-powered performance without proper notice, as reported by AP News.
In a written statement from the organization, SAG-AFTRA cited their particular issues with Llama’s recreation of Jones’ iconic villain, including the fact that the A.I.-generated performance takes potential work away from a willing voice actor.
“We celebrate the right of our members and their estates to control the use of their digital replicas and welcome the use of new technologies to allow new generations to share in the enjoyment of those legacies and renowned roles,” the statement reads. “However, we must protect our right to bargain terms and conditions around uses of voice that replace the work of our members, including those who previously did the work matching Darth Vader’s iconic rhythm and tone in video games.”
Jones — who passed away last September at the age of 93 — remains one of the key prominent actors who gave formal permission to prospective studios (such as Disney) to use A.I.-backed recreations of his voice in any future media. In SAG-AFTRA’s eyes, however, this decision could hamper the potential for working actors hoping to play the role of Jones’ most notable characters, potentially upending the larger entertainment industry as a result.
“Fortnite’s signatory company, Llama Productions, chose to replace the work of human performers with A.I. technology,” the organization wrote. “Unfortunately, they did so without providing any notice of their intent to do this and without bargaining with us over appropriate terms. As such, we have filed an unfair labor practice charge with the NLRB against Llama Productions.”
As I often say when we get another artificial intelligence-prompted lawsuit, the fields of law this technology is generating is staggering. So not only will AI companies need to seek express permission of actor’s and/or their estates (hopefully the law will expand beyond just California), but, if subsequent laws are passed as a result of this case, the AI companies will also need to negotiate with unions. Again, the amount of very, very specific law to be written in relation to AI is enough to add a year to law school, I swear. Also, I wonder why Jones went ahead and gave future permission for his voice to be AI-replicated after his death. Did he get a big payout, or a nice licensing deal that goes to his estate? It’s unusual, considering most of the stories we hear are of celebs railing against AI, both here and in the afterlife. Having worked with the estate of a musical artist, I can also attest that the people left in control can be hawkishly protective of that artist’s legacy, and I mean that equally in terms of sentimental and fiscal factors. It’ll be interesting to see how this case plays out. The history, and law books, are waiting.
photos credit: Robin Platzer/Twin Images/Avalon, Darla Khazei/Avalon, Enzo Fornino/Avalon