AI the frenemy
While artificial intelligence is helping some artists create new work and reach new audiences, it is putting others out of a job. How far that goes depends on how hard artists push back and where boundaries are set for its use.
Pay might have been the headline reason for the recent strike by Hollywood writers, but the use of AI was also a huge part of the writers’ concerns about the future stability of their industry. Actors joining the strike have also been assessing the threat of AI to their livelihoods.
Voiceover artists have been among the first to feel the impact. They have lost out to AI in some of their less glamourous but “bread and butter” work recording announcements for transportation, checkout machines and more and now AI is narrating audiobooks and documentaries too.
With AI becoming more sophisticated, it is able to not only replicate an actor’s voice but their face, body and mannerisms. There are reports of extras unwittingly signing away the rights to their image, so they populate the backgrounds of films in perpetuity, but without being paid.
It’s not just unknown extras – British actor Stephen Fry, who narrated the Harry Potter audiobooks, found himself listening to a very familiar voice when watching a historical documentary that had used an AI system to mimic him.
AI the helping hand
The terms of the Hollywood writers’ deal does not completely ban the use of AI, but says it must be used as a tool, rather than a replacement. The music industry is also using the technology, as a tool, to both create new music and to discover new talent.
Singers and other vocal artists are utilising generative AI along with datasets of their own vocalisations to create new forms of art. They point to the fact that automation has long been a part of music culture, from mixing desks in recording studios to the synthesisers and drum machines that were the basis of electronic music.
The technology is now cheaper and more available, meaning AI can open up new opportunities in the arts to those from less advantaged backgrounds. AI also can democratise the role of talent scouts. Rather than relying on a team of human scouts – with all their biases and limitations – a new record label is using an AI tool to find new artists.
This tool utilises a range of metrics to find undervalued artists from around the world, identifying counterintuitive patterns such as artists with huge fanbases on the other side of the world. Data from music services like Spotify and Shazam, as well as social media, are used by AI to analyse the behaviours and preferences of listeners much faster and in more detail than other technologies.
AI the destroyer
With their reams of data, those same music services are not just helping uncover new talent, they also are reshaping music. As artists are paid per play, they are restructuring their music to get the millions of plays they need to earn half–decent money. The fact that listeners can easily flip from song to song – but they must listen to at least 30 seconds before the artist is paid – means song intros are being truncated to more quickly grab the listener.
Similarly, the vast big data analytics capabilities of Netflix are reshaping the shows and films we watch. The concern is that AI is making entertainment more derivative than innovative, simply mixing and rehashing what humans have already made to deliver quantity over quality. AI can be a useful tool and provide new opportunities but the entertainment industry needs to recognise its limitations – and keep its use within certain limits – to protect its workers and its creativity.
Anne Rose, a Managing Associate at UK law firm Mishcon de Reya, commented: “The dual strike by both WGA and SAG against the film and television studios and streamers illustrates some of the issues with Generative AI and the importance of re-thinking how we adapt to this technology. Even though a deal was passed, there remains a fair amount of discomfort among actors around it – particularly as they did not achieve a complete ban on synthetic performers. Whilst the technology is not yet so advanced that you would star a synthetic performer in a movie, the technology is moving fast and who knows where we will be when the contract is up for renewal in two and a half years!“
For writers, the collective bargaining agreement (MBA) gave them several wins including setting out that AI-generated material will not be considered source material under the MBA, meaning that AI-generated material can’t be used to undermine a writer’s credit or separated rights. It will be interesting to see how this pans out in practice.
Ghost in the machine
As AI takes over ever more aspects of film production, will Hollywood become a ghost town of directors using AI instead of actors and production crew to produce films?
By 2030, artificial intelligence (AI) will be capable of taking over most elements of film production, with – theoretically – no need for the many people currently required to make a movie. Scriptwriters and actors, along with production and post-production roles such as art, sound, cinematography and editing, will be superfluous. Anyone with an idea and the right AI tools will be able to create a film, and much more quickly and cheaply than today.
This is the promise of AI – and the fear of the industry. Recent strikes by Hollywood writers and actors were prompted by concerns about the use of AI as much as demands for better pay. But how replaceable are these artists and will AI really be up to the task?
Doing everything all at once
AI is already being used to automate and improve certain aspects of film production. Visual effects that would take a human days to create can be produced in seconds by AI.
To create Oscar-winning film Everything Everywhere All At Once, AI supported a small VFX team to seamlessly integrate computer-generated elements with live-action footage. This saved time and resources. The film was created by a team of just eight VFX artists – compared to dozens, if not hundreds, on a traditionally made blockbuster – and to tight deadlines.
The big time-saving tools used on Everything Everywhere All At Once were latent diffusion models and background removal. Diffusion models can transform existing videos into new ones by applying any style specified by a text prompt or reference image. Background removal does just that – it automatically removes the background, leaving only the foreground object or person, from an image or video. Together, these tools helped the film’s VFX team to blur the line between reality and fantasy as the protagonist travels through the multiverse.
Fantasy vs reality
While AI excels in genres like animation and sci-fi, so far the technology has failed to master the ability to create photo-realistic images. There is still something “other” to the people and objects created by AI that distinguishes them from real people and things.
But the companies behind the AI used in film, from startup Runway AI to tech giants Google and Meta, say it is just a matter of time before the technology improves. They argue that AI could prove to be as transformative to the film industry as the development of sound, colour or even the camera itself.
The first photographic technology was invented in the 1820s, and revolutionised culture and communication, creating a new art form. In recent decades, smartphones have given everyone a camera in their pocket capable of producing professional-looking images and video, leading to an explosion of new content online. Now, AI is having the same effect, giving more aspiring filmmakers access to previously unattainable tools.
While some fear the impact of AI on artists in the film industry, others see the potential for the technology to unlock human imagination to unimaginable levels. AI may produce better images and video faster than a human artist, but it still relies on the input of human creativity and the direction of human judgement to do so.
Peter Nunn, a partner at UK law firm Mishcon de Reya, commented: "As it does everywhere else, the use of AI in films presents challenges and opportunities. Challenges include questions over who actually owns the rights in AI-generated content – with different countries threatening to take different approaches – as well as the issue of the representation of real people in films who may not have consented to their appearance. However, intellectual property laws have proved themselves very adaptable to the last 30 years of rapid technological change, and will no doubt do so to AI – either through the decisions of the courts or, preferably, legislation."
Energy NOW: Replacing red with green
To achieve the net-zero transition, governments must now focus on cutting red tape to quicken the adoption of renewable energy
The main goal of the Paris agreement – adopted in 2015 at the UN Climate Change Conference (COP21) and now ratified by 195 governments – is to limit global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. Since the COP21 milestone, further commitments have been announced, such as the United States’ net-zero-by-2050 pledge and China’s promise to become carbon-neutral by 2060.
However, many promises are just that: promises, not actions. Based solely on policies that are currently in place, we would instead reach a global temperature increase of 2.9°C, according to the Climate Action Tracker, an independent scientific project that measures government climate action against the Paris agreement targets.
Some climate activists argue that the invasion of Ukraine by oil and gas powerhouse Russia has set back policy progress, as governments across Europe returned to fossil fuels to keep the lights on, rather than seizing the opportunity to shift to renewables.
Attention has also increasingly turned to the role of financial institutions. Although many banks have promised to stop funding fossil fuels, the small print often tells a different story. Many pledges do not come into force until later in the decade, or only cover new business, or exclude businesses deriving only a portion of their revenue from fossil fuels, for example. As a result, in 2022 the world’s biggest banks provided US$673bn in lending to the fossil-fuel sector.
Is it as bad as it seems?
Although there are some obvious examples of governments kicking the climate change can down the road, or making deals that increase fossil-fuel use now in exchange for bigger reductions later, the pace of decarbonisation has in fact increased.
Studies of a range of factors, such as fossil-fuel consumption, energy efficiency and deployment of renewables, and found that the energy crisis caused by the war in Ukraine may actually have fast-tracked the transition by five to ten years. With oil and gas becoming prohibitively expensive, other forms of energy have become increasingly attractive. This has been accompanied by an increased awareness that generating energy domestically, rather than being beholden to countries such as Russia, can play a key role in energy security.
In 2022 investment in solar and wind power exceeded investment in oil and gas wells for the first time. And in 2023 total investment in clean energy is predicted to reach US$1.8trn, compared with US$1trn for fossil fuels. The US government alone has earmarked US$369bn of investment incentives for green tech, renewable energy and electric cars through the Inflation Reduction Act.
The devil is in the details
As countries shift to renewables such as wind and solar, infrastructure is critical. New grid connections are needed to integrate energy from different sources, and new transmission lines must be constructed to take it where it is needed. Better storage will be essential to keep the lights on when the sun is not shining and the wind not blowing, and the entire system must grow. Electricity accounts for just 20% of the world’s energy consumption today, but in the future, it will need to be the backbone of the system.
As things stand, however, essential grid and storage facility improvements are frequently caught up in red tape. The International Energy Agency estimates that global renewable capacity could expand by an additional 25% compared with its main forecast, but only if countries begin to effectively address policy, regulatory, permitting and financing challenges. And that is a big if.
“Reducing regulatory red tape is a key part of efforts to speed up the use of renewable energy,” comments Alexander Rhodes, partner at Mishcon de Reya. “Taking the example of onshore wind, the recent lifting of the de facto ban on new onshore wind developments is certainly a positive start. But when onshore wind could be 14 times more effective in reducing emissions than offshore, there's a legitimate case for removing all special planning requirements and treating it the same as any other piece of infrastructure.”
Energy NEXT: A promise we can’t afford to break
Nuclear fusion could provide clean, reliable, near-limitless energy – exactly what the world needs to end its reliance on fossil fuels and stop their emissions from creating climate change. But a lack of funding could keep the promise of fusion from becoming reality
As governments look for clean-energy alternatives to fossil fuels, nuclear power is making a return. Unlike wind or solar power, it can run 24/7 to give electricity grids the consistent baseload they need, and nuclear reactors can be much smaller than wind or solar farms. However, many people are still wary of nuclear’s toxic waste problem, especially after the 2011 accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan, which released radioactive contaminants into the surrounding environment.
While new nuclear power plants are being built – such as Hinkley Point C, which will be able to generate 7% of the UK’s power requirements by 2027 – scientists are working on a new, safer type of nuclear energy. Today’s nuclear power stations use nuclear fission, in which heavy elements are split into fragments. Nuclear fusion, meanwhile, constitutes the reverse, a process similar to atoms colliding in the sun.
Unlike nuclear fission, there is no radioactive waste from a fusion reaction, so the only disposal problem is getting rid of irradiated reactor components at the end of their useful lives. And the resulting fuel is incredibly efficient. Just 1 kg of fusion fuel is equivalent to 10m kg of fossil fuel.
The promise is that fusion could give the world carbon-free, near-limitless energy – forever.
From prototype to power station
But although nuclear fusion seems to be the answer to the world’s need for clean energy, the process is difficult. Temperatures of 100m°C – six or seven times hotter than the core of the sun – are required, as well as pressure from very high field magnets. Scientists have been trying for almost 70 years to make fusion work, but so far no fusion experiment has managed to produce the sustained energy needed for a power station.
The hope is that these decades of research are now close to bearing fruit. The Joint European Torus (JET), an experimental fusion reactor opened by a consortium of governments, has been running since 1983. Around the reactor, near a tiny village in England, is the “Silicon Valley” of nuclear fusion, where private companies are building on the work of the soon-to-be-closed JET to create their own demonstration plants.
These plants, although experimental, will hopefully be the penultimate prototypes. The aim is to iron out the remaining kinks in the process in the mid-to-late 2020s, so that the first proper power stations could be ready in the early 2030s.
Finding a way through the “valley of death”
These developments show how the search for controlled fusion power is shifting from governments to private enterprise, not just in the UK but also in the EU, China, Japan, Australia, Canada and the US. By 2021 investment in private fusion companies had begun to exceed the annual budget of the US Department of Energy’s Fusion Energy Sciences programme, with the largest new fusion experiments in the US now being built by the private sector.
In the past decade, the number of fusion-focused private companies around the world has grown to at least 42, attracting more than US$6bn in investment from the likes of Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos.
However, funding is currently facing a “valley of death”, according to the Fusion Industry Association, as traditional venture capital investors reach the limits of what they can invest in early funding rounds. The industry must now work to bring in new investors with different pools of capital.
With the world facing a tipping point in the climate crisis, the need for clean energy has never been more urgent. Nuclear fusion may be the answer and, with different companies using different approaches, the odds are increasing that solutions to the challenges of the fusion process will be found. But continued – and growing – investment is needed to make the promise of nuclear fusion a reality.
“Governments can pave the way for commercialisation by ensuring that a clear regulatory framework is in place as soon as possible – ideally, one that is standardised across nations and technology-agnostic,” explains Christina Chambers, associate at Mishcon de Reya. “Clear and standardised regulation shows that national governments back fusion, making it a more attractive investment, and serves to de-risk the industry by giving greater certainty to companies and investors.”
Surrogacy NOW: The new baby boom
Surrogacy is a growing industry, but parents-to-be face mounting challenges as many countries ban the practice. Governments should recognise the increasing necessity for surrogacy and regulate, rather than restrict.
The world is experiencing a new kind of baby boom. Although there are no precise figures on how many children have been born through surrogacy, the development of assisted reproductive technology has created a US$14.4bn global industry – which could grow to US$130bn over the coming decade.
Two main factors are driving the boom: rising infertility among heterosexual couples and growing numbers of same-sex couples wanting children. Many women are now choosing to start families later in life – because of lifestyle choices and economic factors – and this carries a higher risk of a higher risk of failing to conceive. Meanwhile, changing cultural norms have made it easier for same-sex couples to have families, but male couples obviously need a surrogate to make that happen.
Gestational surrogacy, in which a woman carries a foetus developed from the egg and sperm of the “intended parents” or donors, has become the preferred method, as opposed to traditional surrogacy, in which the surrogate conceives with her own egg. Many would-be parents want their child to share their genetic make-up, and it is seen as an easier, cleaner approach from a legal and emotional perspective if the surrogate does not contribute genetic material.
How much for that baby in the window?
But intended parents still face multiple hurdles in building a family through surrogacy. The first obstacle is a legal one. Many countries have outlawed payment for surrogacy, which reduces the number of prospective surrogates, or have banned the practice altogether.
These laws stem from a variety of criticisms of surrogacy, from across the political spectrum. Religious right-wing and conservative groups oppose surrogacy as they believe it disrupts the natural links between marriage, conception, gestation, birth and raising a child. Prominent members of the Italian political party Brothers of Italy have described surrogacy as a crime “even worse than paedophilia”. Meanwhile, some liberal left-wing and feminist groups see surrogacy as violating the dignity of women, using their bodies as a vehicle to achieve someone else’s objective. A well-known British feminist has likened surrogacy to “exploitation, because the inside of a woman’s body is being used as a workplace”.
Exploitation is a particular issue in countries where surrogacy is neither banned nor permitted under law, as in these cases the industry remains unregulated. When surrogates are not protected, they can receive poor medical care, which increases the risks they face, often in countries where maternal mortality rates are already very high. Horror stories of surrogates being forced to carry multiple foetuses, have abortions or being defrauded out of their payment are much more common in unregulated countries.
Intended parents also lack protections when surrogacy is not regulated. Issues range from being defrauded financially or not receiving their child to facing legal hurdles, including long waits to become the child’s legal parents or facing charges of child trafficking.
And then there is the cost. In the US, the total cost – including fees for the surrogate, IVF, brokers and lawyers – ranges from US$110,000 to US$180,000.
Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater
Although some contend that outlawing payments to surrogates reduces the risks of exploitation, many argue that the altruistic model – in which the surrogate is reimbursed only for expenses – does not provide solutions to global surrogacy’s many problems.
First of all, applying the principles of human rights law, women should be able to choose whether and how they use their reproductive systems. And, as cheap air travel and online marketing have led to the setting up of low-cost surrogacy agencies around the world, bans in one place often simply push problems to another.
A better option is for governments to accept that the drivers increasing demand for surrogacy are here to stay, and regulate the practice to protect surrogates and intended parents – as well as children. There is little evidence to suggest that the circumstances of their birth have negative consequences for the psychological well-being of children who are the product of surrogacy. However, regulating the industry to remove unscrupulous players and improving the process so that it is faster and smoother for everyone reduces the chances of negative impacts for the child.
With demand rising rapidly, getting surrogacy right matters now more than ever.
“In England and Wales, the Law Commission published its proposals on surrogacy laws in March 2023, addressing how the current laws (many of which were put in place over 30 years ago) are no longer fit for purpose, and setting out a new system which will offer greater protection and certainty to intended parents, surrogates and the child,” explains Antonia Felix, partner at Mishcon de Reya. “The main change will be a new pathway to parenthood, overseen by newly instated non-profits called ‘regulated surrogacy organisations’. These organisations will ensure the correct process is followed but, more importantly, provide support to all parties.”
Where next?
After choosing a career based on its social impact, giving money to support causes you care about and even donating your kidney to a stranger, what next? Trends in altruism point to it becoming more embedded in all aspects of our lives, as we align our activities to our values. Investing and purchasing ethically are becoming more mainstream, and technology is making it easier to connect people who need help with those willing to give help. Social media is bringing the stories of people in need to wider audiences and crowdfunding platforms enable easy donations. It is common for people in the US without health insurance to try to cover their medical bills on GoFundMe and other platforms. Although it’s less prevalent in the UK, crowdfunding still raised £20m for patients in 2018.
As wealth inequality rises, Alexander Rhodes, managing associate at Mishcon de Reya and Conservation Fellow of the Zoological Society of London, suggests that the global elite will need philanthropy to maintain their social license, while governments will come to rely on it to plug funding gaps in areas where they struggle to effect change—such as the eradication of disease. “Philanthropy’s true value lies in the simple act of giving and receiving; fostering that spirit in our communities is where the future lies.”
Surrogacy NEXT: From baby on board to baby in pod
With scientists seeking to create an artificial womb to save the lives of premature babies, will it be long before an entire pregnancy can be outsourced to technology?
In the film “The Pod Generation”, a couple chooses to outsource pregnancy, with everything from conception to birth handled by an egg-shaped pod. They can take it home to bond, and there is a handy app to control every interaction.
As audiences watch the film’s main characters consider the pros and cons of this new technology – the opportunity to share pregnancy on a more equal footing versus concerns about its unnatural nature and letting technology take over everything – scientists are working to create the world’s first clinically approved artificial womb.
A groundbreaking team of experts across Europe hopes to create an adequate substitute for the protective environment of the maternal womb for babies born very prematurely, in order both to keep them alive and to prevent long-term health complications.
About one in ten babies are born too soon, and pre-term birth complications are the leading cause of child mortality in the under fives, accounting for about 1m deaths worldwide in 2021, according to the WHO and UNICEF. Every year, about 500,000 babies are born extremely prematurely, at less than 28 weeks of gestation.
For this group, incubators are currently the only option, and they do save many lives. However, half of those born at 24 weeks do not survive, partly because their lungs are not yet sufficiently formed to breathe air. What they need is an environment more similar to the womb (which protects them from the air by leaving their lungs filled with liquid), as well as an artificial placenta, attached to the umbilical cord, to improve their organ development and ease the transition to newborn life.
Experts working to eliminate obstacles
This artificial womb is being developed by the Perinatal Life Support (PLS) project. Co-ordinated by Eindhoven University of Technology in the Netherlands, it brings together world-leading experts in obstetrics, neonatology, industrial design, mathematical modelling, ex vivo organ support and non-invasive foetal monitoring.
The project faces two main challenges: finding a way to safely and quickly transfer the baby from the mother to the artificial womb, and keeping the baby from reacting negatively to a foreign environment.
To surmount the first hurdle, the team designed a liquid tunnel. Once inside, the umbilical cord can be cut and the baby transferred to the artificial womb, where the cord is attached to an artificial placenta. However, this must be done quickly. If it takes more than a few minutes, lack of oxygen will damage the baby’s brain. Once safely ensconced in its new home, the baby will spend four weeks receiving all its required oxygen and nutrients through the artificial placenta. At 28 weeks, it can then be transferred to an incubator for the remainder of its pre-term care.
The second hurdle is that blood tends to coagulate if it comes into contact with foreign materials not of its own organism. This is proving to be a trickier issue to overcome, but a successful experiment that connected a pig’s heart to an artificial placenta and kept the organ alive, albeit only for a few hours, is providing useful insights.
Nothing like a mother’s womb?
With major obstacles to overcome and the need for extensive clinical trials before approval can be obtained, it is likely to be at least a decade before the artificial womb becomes available. But the scientists involved are quick to point out that this technology is not suitable for use for the entire period of gestation. So there will be no “pod babies” just yet.
In the time it will take for scientists to perfect the artificial womb, society needs to consider how it wants to address the ethical concerns that this new technology will raise if – or more likely, when – it becomes possible for it to be used for the entire duration of pregnancy.
“In addition to understanding how this will need to develop alongside moral conduct, as it evolves, it may be difficult for the law and the way it is regulated to keep up at the same pace,” explains Antonia Felix, partner at Mishcon de Reya. “This needs to be looked at in order for people to have the right support and protections in place in the future.”
