say it's better quality AI slop than most. He works with different people at times, but he's in charge, and his "creativity" is AI-enabled.
He - Zack London - is a hypocrite who's getting attention now mostly because of his use of unethical tools trained on all the intellectual property the AI companies could steal...but he still wants to maintain ownership of what he considers his own intellectual property:
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/gossip-goblin-zack-london-ai-films-watch-1236544634/
Our goal is to retain as much ownership of the intellectual property as possible. In a future where AI allows anyone to generate huge amounts of content, there will be an overwhelming amount of noise online. The things that will actually hold value are recognizable characters and worlds that audiences connect with. If we can build a small set of stories and IP that people genuinely care about, that’s where the long-term value lies.
Such an asshole. That long-term value of the work done by other creatives is what was stolen to make his plagiarism-by-machine possible.
He's just brushed aside the reality of that theft because it gets in the way of him happily exploiting that stolen work via AI:
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/may/14/gossip-goblin-ai-film-making-new-era-hollywood
But the rising movement triggers despair for critics who fume about “ugly slop” and “AI sludge”, robots replacing human creativity and copyright piracy in AI model training. Artists from Elton John to Scarlett Johansson and the Breaking Bad creator Vince Gilligan have called the training of AI models theft, but London’s view is “that ship has kind of sailed”.
London argues it is impossible to determine how the models’ intelligence is formed, as they have absorbed such vast bodies of information. “It’s all been mushed into a grey goo,” he says. Instead, film-makers must ensure what they produce is not theft: “If I’m making Darth Vader kill Mickey Mouse then I’m stealing … Where it lands for me is [the question of] can you demonstrate sufficient authorship?”
I find this contemptible.
He'd started out years ago writing and illustrating stories and self-publishing. Maybe - if he'd been more successful with that before the AI tools he's now using became available - he'd have the respect for copyright and contempt for AI and AI users, fake artists, that most real artists, professional artists, have.
Because he's willing to use AI, there's no way to know how many of "his ideas" are really his and how many came from AI.
= new reply since forum marked as read