John August

News

And the nominees are…in Weekend Read

Apps, Awards, News, Weekend Read

This year’s Academy Award nominees for best original and best adapted screenplay are a terrific mix of genres and styles, with scripts by established names and newcomers alike.

Craig and I talked through a bunch of them on a [recent Scriptnotes](https://johnaugust.com/2024/back-in-the-fyc), but that’s no substitute for reading them yourself. Fortunately, studios have made most of these scripts available online.

To make it even easier, we’ve added a new *And the Nominees Are…* list to [Weekend Read](https://apps.apple.com/us/app/weekend-read-2/id1534798355). Here you’ll find everything from *American Fiction* to *Zone of Interest*.

screenshot of Weekend Read, listing scripts with poster artwork

Completists will notice that two scripts are missing. The screenplay for *Past Lives* hasn’t been released, while [*Anatomy of a Fall*](https://deadline.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Anatomy-Of-A-Fall-Read-The-Screenplay.pdf) has a fascinating non-traditional format that can’t be converted out of PDF.

[Weekend Read 2](https://apps.apple.com/us/app/weekend-read-2/id1534798355) is free on the App Store.

Speaking to the FTC about generative AI

News, WGA

This afternoon, I represented the WGA at a [virtual roundtable](https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/09/ftc-host-virtual-roundtable-ai-content-creation) organized by the Federal Trade Commission on the impact of AI on creative professions. It ended up being a great panel that brought together a range of disciplines from writing to music to visual arts.

In her opening remarks, FTC Chair Lina M. Khan called out the WGA’s recent wins in establishing AI protections, as did commissioners Rebecca Slaughter and Alvaro Bedoya.

The full video of the panel will be up at some point, but in the meantime, here are my opening remarks, prepared with our incredible Guild staff members Laura Blum-Smith, Erica Knox and Rachel Torres.

—

I’m here on behalf of the Writers Guild of America West, a labor union representing thousands of writers of film, television and streaming series. Our members, and the members of Writers Guild of America East, have just concluded a 148-day strike where artificial intelligence was a key issue. Our fellow artists at SAG-AFTRA are still on strike, with AI as a core issue for them as well. But the fight for protection over our craft and livelihoods doesn’t stop at the bargaining table—while we have been able to achieve groundbreaking protections for writers, we need public policy solutions too. 


Obviously, copyright is an area of government scrutiny, both the copyrightability of AI-generated works, and the degree to which training AI models infringes on copyright. WGA writers do not hold copyright for the scripts we write; those are works made for hire, so the studios—our employers—hold the copyright. But through the power of our union, we have over the decades negotiated an assortment of contractual rights in the works we create, including the right to payment for reuse of our work. It’s a good reminder that while copyright is important, it’s not the end of the story when it comes to protecting artists.


The Guild’s new agreement offers helpful guidance in thinking about future public policy on AI. Our agreement defines that AI is not a writer and that the material it generates is not equivalent to human writing for the purposes of our contract. That means AI cannot rewrite us, nor can it compete with a human writer for credit and the associated financial benefit of that credit. Further, the studios now have to tell us if they are providing us with material generated by AI, and they cannot require us to use AI tools.

We won these protections because we’re a strong union that successfully carried off a nearly five-month strike. But we need to remember that most writers and most artists in this country don’t have unions to protect them. It’s best to think of writers and other artists as tiny businesses, each competing in the marketplace to sell their work. Writers and artists each develop a unique style, voice and brand in order to distinguish themselves. AI fundamentally disrupts that market in ways that could be devastating to the creative economy.


Large language models like the one that underpins ChatGPT have scraped massive volumes of data including our words, our unique perspective. This is theft, not fair use. Our works—protected by copyright and our own contractual rights—are being used entirely without our authorization, without any attribution or any compensation. Right now, you could ask ChatGPT to write something “in the style of” a particular writer, and it would try to do that—appropriate the unique voice of a writer, without that writer’s consent.

As FTC Commissioner Alvaro Bedoya [recently suggested](https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2023-09-04/writers-strike-artificial-intelligence-actors-body-scans-chatgpt-jet-li), this could constitute an unfair method of competition. It is using stolen goods to undercut the price of a seller and create market confusion. And it’s not a hypothetical. Right now, authors are finding [AI-generated knock-offs of their work](https://www.axios.com/2023/08/16/ai-book-publishing-fake-amazon) published on Amazon. They’re having to fight to get those fakes taken down, and protect their brands.

This form of AI appropriation may also have consumer implications. From electronics to organic eggs, consumers expect to be told the origin of a product, and its authenticity. Consumers make choices based on that information. The same will likely be true with AI.

With this strike and this contract, the Writers Guild was able to win groundbreaking AI protections for writers. But it’s important to remember our deal only covers the film and television studios. Most of the real work in AI is being done by companies like Google, Facebook and OpenAI, with which the Guild has no contractual relationship. Public policy will play a crucial role in protecting our members.

In conclusion, AI has the potential to assist the creative community, but only with the consent of that community. Without guardrails, AI poses a profound threat to writers and the integrity of our creative work. AI and its use raises major questions of intellectual property, of transparency, of competition, all of which requires careful oversight to protect the creative economy.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak on behalf of film and television writers.

FTC proposes new merger guidelines

Film Industry, News, WGA

The Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice have drafted new [merger guidelines](https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/07/ftc-doj-seek-comment-draft-merger-guidelines) outlining how the agencies should approach corporate consolidations.

Here are the key points:

1. Mergers should not significantly increase concentration in highly concentrated markets.
2. Mergers should not eliminate substantial competition between firms.
3. Mergers should not increase the risk of coordination.
4. Mergers should not eliminate a potential entrant in a concentrated market.
5. Mergers should not substantially lessen competition by creating a firm that controls products or services that its rivals may use to compete.
6. Vertical mergers should not create market structures that foreclose competition.
7. Mergers should not entrench or extend a dominant position.
8. Mergers should not further a trend toward concentration.
9. When a merger is part of a series of multiple acquisitions, the agencies may examine the whole series.
10. When a merger involves a multi-sided platform, the agencies examine competition between platforms, on a platform, or to displace a platform.
11. When a merger involves competing buyers, the agencies examine whether it may substantially lessen competition for workers or other sellers.
12. When an acquisition involves partial ownership or minority interests, the agencies examine its impact on competition.
13. Mergers should not otherwise substantially lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly.

These are good principles! Notably, they’re not obsessed with whether a merger is likely to raise prices for consumers. Rather, they look more broadly at how consolidation impacts all the components of an industry.

The FTC has invited public comment on these draft guidelines. As of today, there are over 1,000 comments. The WGA has encouraged its members to [share their experiences](https://secure.everyaction.com/FsY4lF9SsEmjHM4YWKB7lA2). Citizens working in every industry should write in as well. Mergers affect all of us, and these policies could shape the next few decades.

I submitted my comment today. Here’s what I wrote.

—

I’m a screenwriter and novelist who has seen firsthand the impact of mergers and consolidation in the film and publishing industries. That’s why I’m writing in support of the FTC and DOJ’s Draft Merger Guidelines. We need to revive and rethink antitrust enforcement in this country so that it recognizes consolidation’s impact on workers, sellers, consumers and citizens.

My work as a screenwriter has found me working for both Disney (including 2019’s *Aladdin*) and what remains of Fox (where I currently have a series in development). I believe Disney should never have been allowed to buy 21st Century Fox in 2019. Not only did it increase concentration and reduce competition for consumers, it did the same for writers. This issue is addressed in Point 11 of your draft guidelines: “When a merger involves competing buyers, the agencies examine whether it may substantially lessen competition for workers or other sellers.”

When Disney bought Fox, it came at the immediate cost of redundant employees’ jobs. It then created downward pressure on the wages throughout the industry, with one less buyer for the services of writers, directors, actors and crew.

I can offer a specific example from my own experience. In 2018, Fox brought me in to meet on a high-profile book adaption for their Fox Family division. By the time it came to make my writing deal, the proposed Disney merger was announced and the division wasn’t allowed to pursue any project that might compete with Disney’s own. All of the executives on the project were let go.

In the process of Hollywood development, projects disappear and executives get fired all the time. What was unique is how this merger broke so many pieces simultaneously, from studio feature films to indies to cable to broadcast television. We should consider not just the immediate negative impact, but also the after effects. Tom Rothman, who used to run Fox’s film division, noted that “Consolidation under giant corporate mandates rarely promotes creative risk-taking. And in the long run, it is always a challenge to compete against horizontal monopolistic power.”

I also work as an author, with three books published by Macmillan and an upcoming book published by Crown (Penguin Random House). Consolidation in the industry means that 60% of books published in English come from just five publishers, and we nearly dropped to four. They have unprecedented control over the market, limiting options for retailers, authors and readers.

I’m a proud member of the Writers Guild of America, West, and have served on both its board and negotiating committee. The entertainment industry’s history of unchecked consolidation is a major factor in the strike of 11,500 writers including myself on May 2 against our employers, who collectively negotiate our three year contract as the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP). SAG-AFTRA has joined us on strike, their 170,000 members seeking a contract that fairly compensates us for the value we create.

It is essential that antitrust agencies consider how any future proposed mergers in this industry — such as the long-rumored Apple/Disney deal — would impact writers and other industry workers. It’s not enough to wait and see; antitrust agencies should proactively investigate and announce decisions, so CEOs don’t propose deals that paralyze the industry.

These Draft Merger Guidelines are the solid principles we need to maintain a vibrant, competitive environment that serves all Americans.

Thank you for the consideration of my comments.

—

You can submit your own comment on the FTC’s [public comment page](https://www.regulations.gov/commenton/FTC-2023-0043-0001).

AI and Copyright

News, WGA

On Wednesday, I participated in a [listening session](https://www.copyright.gov/ai/agenda/5-17-Final-AI-AV-Session-Agenda.pdf) on AI and copyright hosted by the U.S. Copyright Office.

I was representing the WGA West. Other speakers included reps from the DGA, Public Knowledge, the Motion Picture Association and the National Association of Broadcasters.

Video will be up from the event in a few weeks.

Update: [Video is now available](https://stream-media.loc.gov/copyright/Copyright_and_Artificial_Intelligence_Listening_Session_Audiovisual_Works_05172023.mp4)! You can also read the [transcript](https://www.copyright.gov/ai/transcripts/230517-Copyright-and-AI-Audiovisual-Works-Session.pdf), and check out [all the other sessions](https://www.copyright.gov/ai/listening-sessions.html).

In the meantime, I wanted to share my opening remarks, which were a group effort with the team at the Guild.

—

My name is John August. I am a screenwriter and member of the negotiating committee of the Writers Guild of America West, a union that represents thousands of writers who create the content audiences watch every day in theaters, on television and on streaming services.

This is a unique moment for me to be speaking to this issue, because the subject of AI and its role in our industry is a major point of contention in the Guild’s ongoing nationwide strike against the major motion picture and television studios.

While writers who work under the Guild’s collective bargaining agreement are not copyright owners—we create works for hire—the Guild has negotiated an assortment of contractual rights in the works we create, including the right to residual payments for the reuse of our work across media platforms.

In the current negotiations, the Guild has made a proposal to regulate AI for the first time in our contract. The broad purpose of the proposal is to prevent our employers from using AI to devalue the work that writers do—to lower our pay, to deprive us of credit or attribution rights, or, in the most extreme case, to eliminate the need to hire writers altogether.
The proposal would also prohibit the companies from using material written under the Guild’s agreement to train AI programs for the purpose of creating other derivative (and potentially infringing) works.

The companies’ response has been telling: not only did they reject our proposal, they refused to engage on the issue at all. The most they have said is that the technology is new and they are not inclined to limit their ability to use this new technology in the future. This is an ominous response in the eyes of our members and one of many reasons that 11,500 writers have been on strike since May 2.

We often speak of copyright as a means of protecting works of authorship. But copyright was created with the intention of protecting **authors** from appropriation and theft. As we discuss the impact of AI, we need to remember the human authors and not just the corporations who employ them.

—

Following our opening remarks, panelists had the opportunity to answer questions about what rules and policies the Copyright Office should consider.

Speaking on behalf of the Guild, and its 11,500 members currently on strike, I focused on the need to protect the human creators of work.

You can read the [opening statement](https://publicknowledge.org/policy/opening-remarks-at-the-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-listening-session/) of John Bergmayer at Public Knowledge, which specifically mentions the WGA strike. I’ll post other statements as I find them.