Ads
related to: voice acting requirements california law
Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
[1] is a law in the U.S. state of California which sets regulations for talent agents. Noncompliance with the statute on the part of the agent allows actors, writers and other artists to disgorge their financial obligations by petitioning the California Department of Industrial Relations , alleging their talent representatives found them work ...
As movies push the envelope with AI-generated digital voices and likenesses of actors, California now has laws in place to protect those performers.
The current version of the law is codified in sections 6750–53 of the California Family Code and section 1700.37 of the California Labor Code. The law provides that any of the parties may petition a court to approve an entertainment contract, and if the court does so, somewhat different rules apply.
Voice acting makes an important contribution to many films, television productions and advertisements in the United States.Voice acting is needed when making animated films; when the character represented does not appear visually in the action; when the actor playing the part is unable or unwilling to speak in it; or when a character breaks into song, with a singer's voice substituted.
SAG-AFTRA, the union representing more than 150,000 film and TV performers, announced a deal Tuesday that sets terms for the use of artificial intelligence voices in video games.
The law is set to take effect in 2025 and has the support of the California Labor Federation and the Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, or SAG-AFTRA. Another law signed by Newsom, also supported by SAG-AFTRA, prevents dead performers from being digitally cloned for commercial purposes without the permission ...
The Coogan Law, passed in 1939, protects child entertainers by requiring parents to put 15% of a minor's earnings into a trust. More states have introduced legislation in hope of protecting child ...
On June 27, 2000, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California issued a summary judgment in favor of the Franklin Mint. [11] Franklin Mint countersued Diana's estate's lawyers for "malicious prosecution of trademark"—in January 2011 the law firm settled with a $25 million payment to the former owners of the Franklin Mint. [12]
Ads
related to: voice acting requirements california law