Pippa Bets Artist Royalties Can Make AI Video Generation Ethical

Pippa, a text-to-video startup that launched in May, is attempting to carve out a distinct position in the crowded generative AI market by paying artists directly each time a subscriber generates content derived from their work — a model the company's founders say can demonstrate that AI firms do not have to exploit creators to build viable products.

The company's cofounders, Hogan Shrum and Sean Wright, structured Pippa's compensation around per-generation micropayments: artists receive $0.005 per image and $0.003 per second of video. They also receive a share of a 5 percent royalty pool funded by the platform's overall subscription revenue, which Pippa compares in its press materials to Spotify's payment model — a comparison that carries weight given the sustained criticism Spotify has faced from musicians over its own royalty structure.

Monthly subscriptions range from $14.99 to $99.99. As of now, Pippa has approximately 800 paying subscribers and has signed licensing and model training agreements with four human artists, with Shrum saying talks are underway to bring four more into the program.

Artists who wish to participate must complete a multi-step vetting process to confirm the work they submit is their own. Once approved, models trained on their art become available to Pippa's subscribers. The platform also provides each partner artist a profile page that can direct visitors to their work elsewhere online.

Aware of the professional sensitivities, Pippa offers participating artists the option to submit their work under pseudonyms. "We've had so many conversations with artists where they're like, 'I love this, but I don't want to get ostracized by my community,'" Wright explained.

Shrum and Wright told The Verge they see Pippa as a way to move beyond "the bloody history that the AI industry has been built on." Wright drew a historical parallel: "All of these models from the past 18 months have been trained on real people's art without their permission — that's how it was built. I harken it back to when Napster was a thing and everybody was stealing music. But then, Apple came out with the 99-cent song, Napster got shut down, and we figured out a different way to get musical artists paid."

The ethical framing, however, runs into a significant structural limitation. Pippa's current models are built on open models that, in the company's own words, "have initial training on the broader set of content out there" — meaning they involve some degree of art scraped from the internet without creators' explicit consent. The company's longer-term goal is to rely entirely on datasets provided by its in-house partner artists, but that technology is not yet in place.

That tension is not unique to Pippa. Any AI startup whose bespoke models build on a foundation of externally sourced training data faces the same underlying problem, regardless of what ethical commitments it layers on top. Some companies — including Ben Affleck's InterPositive — have emphasized developing wholly original proprietary datasets, though that approach requires substantial upfront capital and typically yields specialized tools rather than general consumer products.

On the product side, Pippa is planning to integrate ByteDance's Seedance 2.5 model, which can generate up to 30 seconds of video footage that can be fine-tuned without starting over from scratch — a capability the company hopes will draw subscribers away from competing platforms.

Whether payments alone are sufficient to win over a creative community that has spent years fighting unauthorized use of its work remains an open question. Pippa's model offers a financial rationale for participation, but the underlying technology still relies on a training history artists had no hand in approving — a gap the company has not yet found a way to close.

Disclaimer