Already, AI clones have been used to cut down on production time, allowing talent more bandwidth to pursue other opportunities. “Instead of five service days in-person,” Shannon said, “It’s three service days, [plus] the right to digital assets to do post-production fixes, or [for] their avatar to do things around the edges.”
“Everyone says YouTube is all about authenticity, and they assume that it has to be the real ‘you.’ But authenticity can come from a lot of different areas.”
Every deal is unique, so there are no set rates related to these AI deals. The structure depends on myriad factors and is constantly shifting based on the nature of a partnership. “I don’t think the market dollars have been determined yet. It’s still relatively early days, and the business models are being formed in real time,” Shannon said. “Frankly, I think it’s going to come down to what consumers want.”
Eric Wei, cofounder of Karat, a financial firm for creators, told me that AI cloning won’t work for all influencers or celebrities. The effects of this new technology likely won’t be evenly distributed. “Khaby is the perfect example of a creator who can do an AI deal, because none of us know anything about him as a person,” he said. “He doesn’t even talk in his videos. The key to his success, ironically, makes him very AI-generatable.”
Wei said that even though Lame’s deal effectively flopped, it got brands talking about AI’s potential with influencers. “More brands will look for creators who don’t have much of a personality beyond their format, and either just replicate them or strike deals with the creators.”
The proliferation of this technology is dangerous for influencers, and they will need to negotiate far more deftly when organizing a brand deal. If the content creator isn’t careful, brands may sneak clauses into contracts allowing the company to retain an influencer’s likeness beyond the terms of the initial agreement.