After users created disrespectful depictions of MLK Jr., OpenAI now allows estates to request restrictions on likenesses in Sora. This "opt-out" policy is a reactive, unscalable game of "whack-a-mole." It creates a subjective and unmanageable system for its trust and safety teams, who will be flooded with requests.
Related Insights
Regardless of an AI's capabilities, the human in the loop is always the final owner of the output. Your responsible AI principles must clearly state that using AI does not remove human agency or accountability for the work's accuracy and quality. This is critical for mitigating legal and reputational risks.
A speaker's professional headshot was altered by an AI image expander to show her bra. This real-world example demonstrates how seemingly neutral AI tools can produce biased or inappropriate outputs, necessitating a high degree of human scrutiny, especially when dealing with images of people.
The controversy over AI-generated content extends far beyond intellectual property. The emotional distress caused to families, as articulated by Zelda Williams regarding deepfakes of her late father, highlights a profound and often overlooked human cost of puppeteering the likenesses of deceased individuals.
AI's unpredictability requires more than just better models. Product teams must work with researchers on training data and specific evaluations for sensitive content. Simultaneously, the UI must clearly differentiate between original and AI-generated content to facilitate effective human oversight.
Startups are becoming wary of building on OpenAI's platform due to the significant risk of OpenAI launching competing applications (e.g., Sora for video), rendering their products obsolete. This "platform risk" is pushing developers toward neutral providers like Anthropic or open-source models to protect their businesses.
Actors like Bryan Cranston challenging unauthorized AI use of their likeness are forcing companies like OpenAI to create stricter rules. These high-profile cases are establishing the foundational framework that will ultimately define and protect the digital rights of all individuals, not just celebrities.
When an AI tool generates copyrighted material, don't assume the technology provider bears sole legal responsibility. The user who prompted the creation is also exposed to liability. As legal precedent lags, users must rely on their own ethical principles to avoid infringement.
OpenAI is relaxing ChatGPT's restrictions, allowing verified adults to access mature content and customize its personality. This marks a significant policy shift from broad safety guardrails to user choice, acknowledging that adults want more freedom in how they interact with AI, even for sensitive topics like erotica.
OpenAI launched Sora 2 knowing it would generate copyrighted content to achieve viral growth and app store dominance, planning to implement controls only after securing market position and forcing rights holders to negotiate.
Effective AI policies focus on establishing principles for human conduct rather than just creating technical guardrails. The central question isn't what the tool can do, but how humans should responsibly use it to benefit employees, customers, and the community.