The Oscars have prohibited AI actors and AI-generated scripts by establishing new human authorship guidelines and an Affidavit of Human Origin for the 99th ceremony.

      **TL;DR** The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has introduced new rules for the 99th Oscars, stipulating that acting nominations can only be for roles “demonstrably performed by humans with their consent” and screenplays must be “human-authored.” Producers will have to submit an Affidavit of Human Origin. AI tools can still be used in VFX, sound, and editing categories, differentiating between AI as a production aid and as a creative author.

      On May 2, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences revealed new eligibility rules for the 99th Academy Awards, with two key stipulations about seven words long. Acting nominations will be confined to roles “demonstrably performed by humans with their consent,” while screenplays need to be “human-authored.” Producers will need to sign an Affidavit of Human Origin when making submissions. The Academy maintains the authority to request further information about the use of generative artificial intelligence and the extent of human authorship in a film.

      These rules will take effect at the ceremony on March 14, 2027, and mark the most significant intervention by a major cultural institution regarding what qualifies as human creative work in the AI era. The Academy has not prohibited AI from the Oscars; instead, it has clarified the definition of film authorship to exclude machines.

      **The distinction**

      The new regulations delineate a clear boundary. AI tools in visual effects, sound design, and film editing remain eligible for nominations in their respective technical categories. For instance, a visual effects artist utilizing AI for crowd simulations, actor de-aging, or compositing digital environments can still win an Oscar. Similarly, a sound designer who employs AI for dialogue cleanup or ambient texture generation may receive a nomination. The Academy acknowledges AI's role in modern filmmaking but insists that performances and screenplays—the core artistic elements of a film—must stem from human creators.

      The Affidavit of Human Origin serves as the enforcement mechanism. Producers must certify, under the threat of disqualification, that credited performances and screenplays are human-generated. Should the Academy have doubts, it can investigate. This is not a vague guideline; it is a binding obligation with consequences.

      OpenAI terminated Sora in March 2026 after a six-month period, demonstrating the importance of the Academy’s timing. Although technology exists to produce photorealistic video from text prompts, it currently cannot replace filmmakers. However, it can create performances resembling actual performances and scripts that appear genuinely penned. The Academy is establishing its criteria before the technology compels the issue rather than after.

      **The context**

      The 2023 SAG-AFTRA strike, the longest in the union’s history, was partly fueled by concerns over AI. Actors requested safeguards against studios utilizing AI to replicate their likenesses without consent. Consequently, the new contract mandates studios to obtain explicit permission before creating digital replicas of performers and clarifies that AI-generated performances cannot supplant contracted human work. The Academy’s new rules extend this principle from labor contracts to artistic acknowledgment: even if a studio possesses the legal right to use an AI-generated performance, it cannot be considered for an Oscar.

      The Writers Guild of America achieved similar protections in its 2023 contract, asserting that AI-generated text cannot receive screenwriting credit and that studios cannot use AI material to diminish writers’ compensation. The Academy’s Affidavit of Human Origin codifies this principle at the awards level. A screenplay may be produced with AI tools' assistance, just as one can be developed with aid from research, outlines, or discussions with collaborators. However, the officially credited writer must be a human who has demonstrably authored the work.

      The EU reached an agreement in March 2026 to prohibit AI-generated non-consensual intimate deepfakes, and the Academy’s rules participate in this regulatory trend: many institutions worldwide are delineating boundaries around AI's capabilities regarding human identity and creative output. The Academy's position is narrower than the EU's, limited to Oscar eligibility rather than legality, yet it wields cultural significance that legislation may not. An Oscar conveys what the film industry values, and the Academy has determined it prioritizes human performance and authorship over technical prowess.

      **The technology**

      The practical challenge of enforcing these new regulations may intensify as technology advances. Current AI systems can create short video segments, synthesize voices, and generate competent but formulaic screenplays. None of these capabilities could deceive an informed voter during a two-hour film viewing. However, the trajectory toward increasingly sophisticated AI is evident. In the coming years, it will be technically feasible to fabricate performances indistinguishable from those of human actors or to produce screenplays that read as though crafted entirely by humans.

      ByteDance has implemented watermarking and intellectual property safeguards to Seedance 2.0 prior to its global deployment, and the movement towards machine-readable provenance markings in AI-generated content may equip the Academy with the technical means for enforcement. If AI