Scarlett Johansson has become the most visible face of a growing Hollywood backlash against artificial intelligence, accusing tech giants of “theft” and rallying hundreds of creatives to demand new rules. What began as a personal dispute over a familiar-sounding AI voice has widened into a coordinated campaign that casts generative tools as an existential threat to artistic control, livelihoods, and even basic consent.
Her revolt is not a lone celebrity outburst but a structured push that now includes open letters, legal threats, and a sweeping industry coalition. At its core is a simple claim with far-reaching implications: if AI companies are training systems on actors’ performances, musicians’ recordings, and writers’ scripts without permission or pay, then the business model of modern AI rests on appropriating other people’s work.
From personal dispute to public crusade
The current wave of anger traces back to Johansson’s own clash with one of the most powerful AI developers, when she accused the company of using a voice that sounded uncannily like hers after she had declined to work with it. In that dispute, she threatened legal action over an alleged voice imitation, arguing that generative systems cannot simply appropriate a performer’s vocal identity because it is technically possible. The confrontation crystallized a fear that AI could recreate an actor’s presence without their consent, turning a lifetime of work into raw material for a product they do not control.
That personal flashpoint landed in a culture already primed by Johansson’s association with artificial intelligence on screen. In Avengers, Age of Ultron, she played Scarlett Johansson’s Black Widow fighting a rogue AI, and in another film she voiced Samantha, an operating system that blurs the line between human and machine. Those roles, highlighted in a profile that placed her among the 100 most influential people in AI, now frame her real-world activism, as she uses her status as Scarlett Johansson, Black to question how far tech firms should be allowed to go in mimicking human performance.
The open letter that named AI “theft”
Johansson’s dispute quickly evolved into a broader political project as she joined other Hollywood figures in a blunt open letter accusing AI giants of “theft.” In that letter, she and fellow signatories argued that generative platforms are ingesting scripts, songs, and performances at industrial scale without permission, then selling access to systems built on that unlicensed material. The message, echoed in coverage of Scarlett Johansson Joins Hollywood Stars In Accusing AI Giants Of Theft In Blunt Open Letter, framed the issue not as a niche copyright quarrel but as a structural problem with how these AI giants operate.
The letter’s language was deliberately stark, rejecting the idea that scraping creative work for training is a harmless side effect of innovation. Instead, Johansson and her peers described it as a business model that shifts value away from the people who make culture and toward companies that package their output into automated tools. By calling this “theft,” they signaled that the fight is not only about royalties but about whether artists retain any say over how their work is repurposed in a world of synthetic media.
“Stealing Isn’t Innovation”: a coalition of 800 creatives
The revolt reached a new scale when Johansson helped front a campaign built around a blunt slogan: “Stealing Isn’t Innovation.” The push, launched in Jan, brought together Scarlett Johansson, Chaka Khan, More Campaign Against AI, Theft, Stealing Isn, and other high-profile names who argue that generative platforms are profiting from unlicensed use of their work. The campaign’s materials describe AI training on music, film, and television as a form of industrial-scale copying, and they position Johansson and Chaka Khan as emblematic of performers whose voices and likenesses are especially vulnerable to GenAI platforms.
Behind the slogan is a formidable roster. Jan saw Scarlett Johansson, Cate Blanchett Among Creatives Condemning Big Tech, Anti, Campaign, with exactly 800 supporters signing on to condemn what they describe as “stealing our work” to build AI tools. That figure, 800, is not a symbolic flourish but a headcount of actors, writers, directors, and musicians who have put their names to the demand that tech companies seek consent and pay for training data. Coverage of the effort notes that Celebrities, Scarlett Johansson, Cate Blanchett and Joseph Gordon have also appeared in an ad for the push, turning the campaign into a recognizable brand that can pressure studios, labels, and platforms as well as the AI firms themselves, as seen in reporting on Creatives Condemning Big and on the Celebrities backing the campaign.
Economic stakes and the charge of “theft”
At the heart of Johansson’s argument is an economic claim: that AI companies are building lucrative products on top of creative labor without sharing the upside. Advocates aligned with her describe a scenario in which studios or platforms can use AI to generate scripts, voices, or background performances instead of hiring human professionals, while the underlying systems were trained on those same professionals’ past work. One analysis of The Economic Impact puts it bluntly, saying these AI companies are making a ton of money off creative hard work and they are not paying the people whose material made that possible, while still insisting it is possible to have it all if creators’ rights are respected, as highlighted in The Economic Impact.
Johansson’s own language has sharpened over time. In one interview, she accused tech companies of “theft” to train AI, arguing that they are ingesting performances and scripts without permission and then selling access to systems that can mimic those works. Reporting by By Laura Harding notes that she framed this as a question of basic fairness, saying that if AI is built on other people’s labor, those people should have a say in how it is used and be compensated accordingly. The coverage, which appeared under an RSS feed with the markers Jan, RSS, Published, Thu, Last, By Laura Harding, underscores how her rhetoric has shifted from cautious concern to a direct accusation that the current AI training regime amounts to theft to train.
Lawmakers, deepfakes, and the push for regulation
Johansson’s campaign is not confined to public letters and slogans; she has also turned to lawmakers, urging them to set boundaries on how AI can use people’s images and voices. In Feb, Scarlett Johansson called on U.S. legislators to pass laws limiting the use of artificial intelligence and to make such legislation a priority, arguing that existing rules are not equipped to handle synthetic media that can convincingly impersonate real people. Her appeal, described in detail in coverage of Scarlett Johansson, reflects a belief that voluntary guidelines from tech firms are not enough when the stakes include reputational harm, fraud, and the erosion of trust in recorded media.
Her sense of urgency has been sharpened by the spread of deepfakes that use her likeness. By Movieguide, Contributor reported that Scarlett Johansson called for lawmakers to fast track stronger AI regulation after an AI-generated video using her image went viral, illustrating how easily her face and voice can be repurposed without consent. That episode, detailed in coverage of Scarlett Johansson, turned an abstract policy debate into a personal example of what is at stake when anyone’s likeness can be cloned and distributed at scale.
More from Morning Overview