Entertainment news and discussion on TalkFuse.
Videogame lawyer says it’s become ‘just boilerplate’ this year to include no-AI clauses in contracts: ‘It’s not worth the legal liability’
A videogame lawyer says clauses prohibiting the use of artificial intelligence have become routine in industry contracts this year. The shift reflects growing concern among studios and contractors about legal exposure when AI tools may use, reproduce or generate material with uncertain rights.
The lawyer’s central argument is that avoiding AI-related liability is now a standard commercial precaution rather than an unusual demand. The article frames the clauses as a response to unresolved questions over copyright, ownership and responsibility for AI-assisted work in game development.
In short
- No-AI clauses are becoming standard in game contracts.
- Legal liability is driving the change.
- Copyright uncertainty remains a key concern.
Steelman: both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Studios and contractors are right to adopt no-AI clauses as standard precaution. Given genuine legal uncertainty surrounding copyright infringement, ownership of AI-generated work, and liability for unauthorised training data, including protective clauses represents sensible risk management. Until courts and lawmakers establish clearer precedent, defensive contractual measures offer reasonable protection against unforeseen legal exposure and constitute basic commercial prudence.
The case against
Blanket no-AI prohibitions represent an overreaction to uncertain legal risks that may stifle beneficial innovation and efficiency gains. Many legitimate AI applications—such as using specific tools for asset generation or testing—create no copyright or liability concerns. Overly restrictive clauses may prevent studios from adopting productivity-enhancing tools without addressing the particular legal questions at stake. A more nuanced approach distinguishing between problematic and unproblematic uses would better serve both legal safety and technological progress.
Explained simply
Video games are made by teams of studios, staff and outside contractors, who agree in contracts how work can be used and who is responsible for it. Those agreements increasingly address artificial intelligence tools, which can help produce or alter text, images, music and other material.
Rules around the rights to AI-assisted work are still uncertain, including who owns the result and whether material used to create it was used lawfully. A contract can set limits on using these tools and assign responsibility, so the issue matters to both the companies making games and the people they hire.