AI actress dispute surfaces
Coverage of the AI-created actress 'Tilly Norwood' has prompted union conversation about guardrails for generative performance, with Equity and SAG‑AFTRA leadership quoted on the need for boundaries in synthetic acting. Reporters frame the debate as part of broader scrutiny over how generative models are used in performance work. (marieclaire.com)
An artificial “actress” named Tilly Norwood has become a labor issue, with actors’ unions now using her as an example of where they want limits on synthetic performers. (marieclaire.com) Tilly Norwood is not a person but a digital character created by Eline Van der Velden, and the backlash accelerated after Van der Velden said in 2025 that several talent agencies had reached out about representation. Marie Claire reported that the claim spread through Hollywood, while WME and Gersh said they would not represent Tilly. (marieclaire.com) On September 30, 2025, the Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists said Tilly “is not an actor” and called her “a character generated by a computer program.” The union also said producers cannot use synthetic performers without meeting contract duties that “require notice and bargaining” in those cases. (nbcnews.com) The dispute sits inside a broader fight over how studios use generative artificial intelligence, which can build a face, voice or full screen performance from training data instead of hiring a human performer for every step. The union’s 2023 film and television contract already added rules on informed consent and compensation for digital replicas after the 118-day strike that year. (bloomberg.com) (backstage.com) The issue is active again in 2026 because SAG-AFTRA is negotiating a new studio contract and has floated a “Tilly tax” to make synthetic performers cost as much as human actors. Executive director Duncan Crabtree-Ireland said on March 28 that the union wants “economic incentives” to keep work with people. (bloomberg.com) In Britain, Equity has been pushing on the same front. On December 4, 2025, Equity opened an indicative ballot covering more than 7,000 film and television members and asked whether they were prepared to refuse digital scanning on set to win stronger artificial intelligence protections. (equity.org.uk) Equity general secretary Paul W. Fleming said producers still had not agreed to protections on using performers’ work and likenesses to train artificial intelligence systems. The union said the ballot was the first of its kind for its full film and television performer section and could lead to a statutory ballot later. (equity.org.uk) Developers and some startups are arguing for a licensed market instead of a ban. Deadline reported on April 9 that a new platform called Twinnin, backed by Google and Nvidia, lets actors create an “identity record” and license their likenesses to studios and brands under subscription plans. (deadline.com) Van der Velden has made a similar argument for Tilly, saying artificial intelligence is “a new paintbrush” and that AI characters should be treated as their own genre rather than as replacements for human actors. SAG-AFTRA answered that point in 2025 by saying creativity should remain “human-centered.” (nbcnews.com) (variety.com) The policy fight now reaches beyond contracts. Crabtree-Ireland has also backed the NO FAKES Act of 2025, a bill in Congress that would create protections around unauthorized digital replicas of a person’s voice and likeness. (congress.gov) (bloomberg.com) Tilly Norwood still is not a working human performer, but her name now shows up in bargaining proposals, union statements and entertainment coverage as shorthand for the same question: who gets paid when a machine can imitate a performance. (marieclaire.com) (bloomberg.com)
