James Cameron's Letter Regarding Him Joining an A.I. Company.

*(NOTE: This letter was already mailed to multiple entities including Mr. Cameron's company himself. I am not adding additional links or pictures for flair. I am just posting the initial main letter in it's entirety to save it here publicly.) ************************************************************************************************************************************************** I want to apologize in advance. The letter below is possibly reckless, bold, and wild and may be without merit but I wanted to write it anyway by myself with no editor or preview outside of my Lawyer, for the most part. A part of me was honestly very afraid to write it but even more afraid wondering what if no one has the guts to say anything about this. I have these weird thoughts from time to time but wanted to apologize. If you do think this thought has merit, please share with any of those who may listen or have the power to do something about it. Apologies if this is currently being discussed or if anything written is off base, incorrect, or inappropriate. My intent is to start a discussion, but it’s a discussion I’m serious about. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Dear Director’s Guild of America, Producer’s Guild of America, and any creative person willing to listen to this inquiry and beyond, I am not a member of this guild or any other entertainment based protective guild. This letter is being written out of a deep concern for the future of your industry and the industries of art in general. The commodification of art has always been an incredibly tricky subject but as the late great Peter Bogdanovich once said “The problem with filmmaking as an art is that it’s a business and the problem with filmmaking as a business is that it’s an art.” I’m a fan of art, in particular, the kind made by humans. As A.I. grows the rights of artists and the murkiness of the business of art keeps growing murkier and murkier. “I was at the forefront of CGI over three decades ago, and I’ve stayed on the cutting edge since. Now, the intersection of generative AI and CGI image creation is the next wave. The convergence of these two totally different engines of creation will unlock new ways for artists to tell stories in ways we could have never imagined. Stability AI is poised to lead this transformation. I’m delighted to collaborate with Sean, Prem, and the Stability AI team as they shape the future of all visual media.” – James Cameron. I’ve seen models where A.I. can predict breast cancer earlier than our standard tests and models. Cameron is planning on using this technology to take from and evaporate all visual artists. I do not think this is a net-positive for artists. While there are some wonderful fringe cases to be made, I think using A.I. for this purpose lacks a dangerous level of foresight that should be required to safely and ethically use this technology in the arts. I’ll get right to my point. I think James Cameron, director of “The Terminator”, “Avatar”, and many others, has openly made a bid to dissolve your industry and the visual arts from the inside out by joining “Stability A.I.”. He should be made to forfeit his membership to any entertainment and visual media guild he belongs to that was recently on strike fighting against this very thing. These engines utilize other people’s work that were never asked permissions or given compensation or credit and I’m assuming he was hired on to streamline this technology claiming it for the entertainment industry and all visual media. But, How long and devastating were the strikes for your members? Wasn’t one of the main reasons for this strike A.I. and how it might directly affect your lively hoods? Doesn’t his statement sound not only pompous but incredibly dangerous and deeply counter to what the entire point of the strikes were? Remember he said, ‘all visual media’. James Cameron has had a long-standing habit of alleged intellectual property theft. His flagship film “The Terminator”, notably made by human hands, was successfully sued by Harlen Ellison for ripping off “The Outer Limits” episodes “Demon with a Glass Hand” (1964) and “Solider” (1964), and while he’s said in so many words over the years that that ‘isn’t really the case’, his track record post “The Terminator” for originality is fairly low. “True Lies” is allegedly a remake of “La Totale” (Even featuring a scene very similar to Cameron’s famous Uzi scene right in its trailer as well as many other things from his final film.) “Avatar” has been picked apart for its allegedly derivative nature ad-nauseum. “Titanic” seems to be him saying he can do “A Night to Remember” and recently he even said he wanted to do a movie about the atomic bomb right after “Oppenheimer” just won best picture. If his claims that Harlin Ellison was way off base when being sued for “The Terminator” why does it seem this behavior is a predatory career habit at this point? All he’s done, it would seem, is take and put a good polish on other people’s work but now I fear he wants to take ALL of the ideas in one swoop! Personally, the man who deserves more credit in making Cameron's career is the late great Stan Winston, a man who built things with his hands in a factory. For my money one of the largest appeals to his "Avatar" film was the work of Wayne Barlowe. What would that work be if Cameron had simply used an A.I. system and just typed a prompt "Wayne Barlowe like creature"? That would rob Wayne of his credit and his work. "Aliens" would not be the same without Hans Rudolf Giger and not an A.I. simulacrum of Hans Rudolf’s style either. Roger Corman gave this man his start and would most likely roll over in his grave to find out he helmed a single film costing around a billion dollars. The mind that created and relished in that kind of excess is about to start developing at an A.I. company. Maybe one day very soon you'll simply be able to type "What if Humphrey Bogart was John Wick?" And then there won't be any need for the film industry to exist at all! When that happens, I suppose the only thing to do is to grant James Cameron the final Academy Award for technical achievement and throw in the final towel, not just on cinema, but on art. He’s supported by Disney who seems to have no moral conundrums about putting dead people in their films without their permissions. I do realize Ian Holm’s widow gave permissions for his appearance in “Alien: Romulus”. Holms as a specific example may not be the best example however this practice still gives me pause, and is honestly the main reason I skipped seeing that film. I’m just one man though. That is still a very murky different conversation though. Rest assured A.I. doesn’t ask permissions. If the entire business of art is to be dissolved why have laws or permissions for anything in art? It’s illegal to photograph someone in California without their permission thusly should it be illegal to create a representation of them in a computer without permissions too? To my knowledge the technology of “Avatar” hasn't even been utilized by any other filmmakers in 10 years post “Avatar” and sadly seems counter to both the film and Disney's "Going Green" message and any sentiment about sharing emerging technologies with other filmmakers. I might be wrong about this but I could not find any evidence. If he wants to 'share' this technology his track record shows not only, does he not really like to do that he doesn't even like to share credit very much. James Cameron is one of the most profitable (800$ Million Personal Estimated Net-Worth.) and biggest names in the industry and it would be deeply prudent to make an example of him and others by revoking memberships in the “Director’s Guild of America” and the “Producer’s Guild of America” and any other visual medium or creativity guild he belongs and anyone seeking to abuse A.I. technology in the arts going forward. I think this would be a most efficient safety measure and example to clamp down on the misuse of A.I. technology in the arts. Him joining “Stability AI” is a spit in the face of all those who went on strike and were affected by the strike full stop. With a net-worth estimate of around 800 million I’m fairly confident he was able to survive during that time and would survive this decision if not his ego. If he wants to pursue A.I. he should be made to do it without the support of those who went on strike to fight against it. Otherwise, what message are you sending to everyone else in the business? Acclaimed Author Alan Moore had said once that ‘culture was turning to steam’ and with the abuse of tropes, re-makes, adaptations, and recreations making the industry appear more and more stale by the day there still is a human element we need to preserve and find original voices to reflect our times, our lives, our fears, and our dreams. That is what art is for. That is what art is! It is a reflection of our humanity! Destroying the human element of art is to destroy art and in turn part of our humanity, expression, and communication. A.I. has great practical applications that are currently being developed but A.I. to usurp human element of art seeks to turn art into novelty. Why would anyone even be compelled to learn an artistic discipline in the future if it could be so easily done by machine on the backs of other people’s works. These machines could be helpful but could also erode human learning and growth in a time where I think we should all be growing. After the strikes, Covid-19, and many other factors slowing productions and work in the creative arts this would be another huge and maybe even final deathblow to this industry. This saddens me greatly seeing so many new voices about to lose their voice. If this technology is over-cranked and made a new form of media, I think it could be as devastating to the modern zeitgeist as the burning of the Library of Alexandria. Don’t allow this man to use A.I. to cleave the industry in pieces and mark his claim on the ashes as superior. If you do not revoke his membership and make an open and public mockery of him then I’m afraid your strikes, or at least the parts regarding A.I., were completely useless because you are saying that you are excepting of A.I. only because a historically rich, successful, powerful, and famous man endorses it. Keeping him in the Guilds is setting a dangerous example and letting people know that A.I. in art is now perfectly okay and that this form of advanced ‘theft’ is okay. A.I. also uses a tremendous amount of energy. Currently it is cannibalizing itself and taking from other A.I. works when prompted making essentially a xerox of a xerox and utilizing the same amount of energy, to my knowledge, just to do it and reportedly making lesser quality images. I realize A.I. is new and perhaps new models can be made more energy efficient but currently, as far as I know, it is not. If one single A.I. image requires a significant amount of energy imagine how much energy would a feature film require? From the director of “Avatar” this seems even more ironically hypocritical than even the director of “The Terminator” endorsing A.I.. I’ve no idea how this is energy-efficient especially because the Walt Disney logo is front and center on the ‘GREEN’ page linked off of the P.G.A. website. Green Production Guide A lot of you respect this man. I can understand why. I love his films. They are immensely entertaining. However, I feel deeply this must be done to set an example and precedent going forward for the future of all visual media. Maybe you can’t stop the tide. Maybe you never can, but I think for the time being you can work to build a better dam. As much as I love the 'what-if machine' episode of "Futurama" a real danger is not only the power it would use but typing "What if Stanley Kubrick had directed Hellraiser?", would not only bastardize the work of Mr. Kubrick and Mr. Barker but could be done with no crew whatsoever and transform art into cheap novelty and infringe on the rights to their works. I think there may be a place for this in the future though once the technology is far more regulated and pruned. I think there are real uses for it in the industry. I had an old friend die recently from falling off a scaffolding on set. If his work was done in the computer, maybe he'd still be alive, just out of work. They could be used to clean up older film and maybe find lost film, but they must be monitored and regulated to a degree no different than any caustic chemical that is regulated in any factory across America. Don’t let the weeds of the digital jungle get out of control here. A.I. is incredibly murky in the arts and I think the waters should be clear before the industry decides to take a dangerous swim that may turn into a long squall big enough to sink the entire industry. If you could control a model only to seek out art that you own the rights of or things within the public domain, I wouldn't worry so much, and probably would never have been compelled to write anything about it. The #METOO movement helped stamp out inappropriate sexual behavior that had run rampant for many years. I realize comparing Weinstein to Cameron is a strong hyperbole but ‘theft’ is also a serious crime, maybe that’s not the right word, but it seems to be the real deep sentiment among artists. I think utilizing A.I inappropriately should be something the DGA and PGA should be looking at more seriously among its members moving forward even the most powerful and successful of those members, maybe especially those people. “If you set your goals ridiculously high, you’ll fail above everyone else’s success.” – James Cameron. I suppose this is a lofty goal, request and thought to have. But I’ve taken a page out of his own handbook to make this argument. I think he should be asked to step down as a member of any entertainment guild he belongs to and there should be penalties on anyone abusing this technology unless he and others can demonstrate clearly that he plans on using it responsibly and ethically. But how? A.I uses a tremendous amount of energy. A.I. takes from a pool of artists online without thought to permissions. Has any A.I. company addressed how, or even their concerns for their own dilution of their own ‘product’ after it started cannibalizing itself? I understand how bold and foolish this request may be and if you feel it is offensive or timewasting, I do apologize but I feel that this idea has merit. If this query is off-base and I am misinformed I do deeply apologize for all parties effected. I was considering not writing this at all but I thought deeply about if it could have a helpful effect I might as well speak my thoughts and try. To quote Mr. Cameron again, “I’m delighted to collaborate with Sean, Prem, and the Stability AI team as they shape the future of all visual media.” Ask yourself again why these select few men should have this much power and control over…“ALL VISUAL MEDIA”! He needs to be made an example of because of his status. Why on earth is he still being supported under the umbrella and protection of the guilds after the strikes? "I'll tell you the problem with the scientific power you are using here: It didn't require any discipline to obtain it...Your Scientists Were So Preoccupied With Whether Or Not They Could, They Didn’t Stop To Think If They Should – Ian Malcolm, Jurassic Park. Sincerely, Daniel Louis Krone daniellouiskrone@gmail.com (251) – 605 – 3584 Daniel Krone - IMDb Maybe there is no place in this world for Fitzcarraldo. Maybe that boat should have simply been carried up the mountain by a computer. “Underlying that adaptability, however, has been a consistent understanding that human creativity is the sine qua non at the core of copyrightability, even as that human creativity is channeled through new tools or into new media.” Taken from Thaler V. Perlmutter the court case. This letter was written by me, Daniel Louis Krone, and my words have not been augmented by any A.I. models. I would implore you to send this letter out to anyone who may listen, maybe even if you don’t, I feel this discussion is too important for the future of art and even deeper what art represents…our humanity. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2022cv1564-24 https://screenrant.com/terminator-movie-james-cameron-harlan-ellison-lawsuit-explained/#:~:text=Unfortunately%20for%20James%20Cameron,%20Ellison,%20despite%20his%20enjoyment%20of%20the (Unfortunately while I was able to find Thaler V. Perlmutter I was unable to find the actual wordage of this case as it would be filed differently as a lawsuit and I’m unaware of how to look up this particular style case. My lawyer does have a copy of this e-mail but I’m sure any of your lawyers who specialize in entertainment law could find the specifics of this case easier, if you may find it useful.) https://stability.ai/news/james-cameron-joins-stability-ai-board-of-directors Green Production Guide https://gizmodo.com/famous-ai-artist-says-hes-losing-millions-of-dollars-from-people-stealing-his-work-2000505822