Main topic: The New York Times updates its terms of service to prohibit scraping its articles and images for AI training.
Key points:
1. The updated terms of service prohibit the use of Times content for training any AI model without express written permission.
2. The content is only for personal, non-commercial use and does not include training AI systems.
3. Prior written consent from the NYT is required to use the content for software program development, including training AI systems.
The use of copyrighted works to train generative AI models, such as Meta's LLaMA, is raising concerns about copyright infringement and transparency, with potential legal consequences and a looming "day of reckoning" for the datasets used.
Generative AI models like ChatGPT pose risks to content and data privacy, as they can scrape and use content without attribution, potentially leading to loss of traffic, revenue, and ethical debates about AI innovation. Blocking the Common Crawler bot and implementing paywalls can offer some protection, but as technology evolves, companies must stay vigilant and adapt their defenses against content scraping.
Media and entertainment industries are hesitant to take legal action against A.I. programs using their content due to uncertainty surrounding copyright law and fair use.
The New York Times is considering legal action against OpenAI as it feels that the release of ChatGPT diminishes readers' incentives to visit its site, highlighting the ongoing debate about intellectual property rights in relation to generative AI tools and the need for more clarity on the legality of AI outputs.
Three artists, including concept artist Karla Ortiz, are suing AI art generators Stability AI, Midjourney, and DeviantArt for using their work to train generative AI systems without their consent, in a case that could test the boundaries of copyright law and impact the way AI systems are built. The artists argue that feeding copyrighted works into AI systems constitutes intellectual property theft, while AI companies claim fair use protection. The outcome could determine the legality of training large language models on copyrighted material.
A federal judge has ruled that works created by artificial intelligence (A.I.) are not covered by copyrights, stating that copyright law is designed to incentivize human creativity, not non-human actors. This ruling has implications for the future role of A.I. in the music industry and the monetization of works created by A.I. tools.
The Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers has proposed guidelines for the usage of artificial intelligence (AI) and data transparency in the entertainment industry, stating that AI-created material cannot be considered literary or intellectually protected, and ensuring that credit, rights, and compensation for AI-generated scripts are given to the original human writer or reworker.
Lawyers must trust their technology experts to determine the appropriate use cases for AI technology, as some law firms are embracing AI without understanding its limits or having defined pain points to solve.
The Associated Press has released guidance on the use of AI in journalism, stating that while it will continue to experiment with the technology, it will not use it to create publishable content and images, raising questions about the trustworthiness of AI-generated news. Other news organizations have taken different approaches, with some openly embracing AI and even advertising for AI-assisted reporters, while smaller newsrooms with limited resources see AI as an opportunity to produce more local stories.
Artificial intelligence (AI) poses risks in the legal industry, including ethical dilemmas, reputational damage, and discrimination, according to legal technology experts. Instances of AI-generated content without proper human oversight could compromise the quality of legal representation and raise concerns about professional responsibility. Additionally, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) recently settled a lawsuit involving discriminatory use of AI in the workplace, highlighting the potential for AI to discriminate. Maintaining trust and credibility is crucial in the reputation-reliant field of law, and disseminating AI-generated content without scrutiny may lead to reputational damage and legal consequences for lawyers or law firms. Other legal cases involving AI include allegations of copyright infringement.
Salesforce has released an AI Acceptable Use Policy that outlines the restrictions on the use of its generative AI products, including prohibiting their use for weapons development, adult content, profiling based on protected characteristics, medical or legal advice, and more. The policy emphasizes the need for responsible innovation and sets clear ethical guidelines for the use of AI.
A Washington D.C. judge has ruled that AI-generated art should not be awarded copyright protections since no humans played a central role in its creation, establishing a precedent that art should require human authorship; YouTube has partnered with Universal Music Group to launch an AI music incubator to protect artists from unauthorized use of their content; Meta has introduced an automated translator that works for multiple languages, but concerns have been raised regarding the impact it may have on individuals who wish to learn multiple languages; major studios are hiring "AI specialists" amidst a writers' strike, potentially leading to a future of automated entertainment that may not meet audience expectations.
Leading news organizations, including CNN, The New York Times, and Reuters, have blocked OpenAI's web crawler, GPTBot, from scanning their content, as they fear the potential impact of the company's artificial intelligence technology on the already struggling news industry. Other media giants, such as Disney, Bloomberg, and The Washington Post, have also taken this defensive measure to safeguard their intellectual property rights and prevent AI models, like ChatGPT, from using their content to train their bots.
AI Algorithms Battle Russian Disinformation Campaigns on Social Media
A mysterious individual known as Nea Paw has developed an AI-powered project called CounterCloud to combat mass-produced AI disinformation. In response to tweets from Russian media outlets and the Chinese embassy that criticized the US, CounterCloud produced tweets, articles, and even journalists and news sites that were entirely generated by AI algorithms. Paw believes that the project highlights the danger of easily accessible generative AI tools being used for state-backed propaganda. While some argue that educating users about manipulative AI-generated content or equipping browsers with AI-detection tools could mitigate the issue, Paw believes that these solutions are not effective or elegant. Disinformation researchers have long warned about the potential of AI language models being used for personalized propaganda campaigns and influencing social media users. Evidence of AI-powered disinformation campaigns has already emerged, with academic researchers uncovering a botnet powered by AI language model ChatGPT. Legitimate political campaigns, such as the Republican National Committee, have also utilized AI-generated content, including fake images. AI-generated text can still be fairly generic, but with human finesse, it becomes highly effective and difficult to detect using automated filters. OpenAI has expressed concern about its technology being utilized to create tailored automated disinformation at a large scale, and while it has updated its policies to restrict political usage, it remains a challenge to block the generation of such material effectively. As AI tools become increasingly accessible, society must become aware of their presence in politics and protect against their misuse.
Artificial intelligence (AI) tools can put human rights at risk, as highlighted by researchers from Amnesty International on the Me, Myself, and AI podcast, who discuss scenarios in which AI is used to track activists and make automated decisions that can lead to discrimination and inequality, emphasizing the need for human intervention and changes in public policy to address these issues.
AI technology is making it easier and cheaper to produce mass-scale propaganda campaigns and disinformation, using generative AI tools to create convincing articles, tweets, and even journalist profiles, raising concerns about the spread of AI-powered fake content and the need for mitigation strategies.
The United States Copyright Office has issued a notice of inquiry seeking public comment on copyright and artificial intelligence (AI), specifically on issues related to the content AI produces and how it should be treated when it imitates or mimics human artists.
“A Recent Entrance to Paradise” is a pixelated artwork created by an artificial intelligence called DABUS in 2012. However, its inventor, Stephen Thaler, has been denied copyright for the work by a judge in the US. This decision has sparked a series of legal battles in different countries, as Thaler believes that DABUS, his AI system, is sentient and should be recognized as an inventor. These lawsuits raise important questions about intellectual property and the rights of AI systems. While Thaler's main supporter argues that machine inventions should be protected to encourage social good, Thaler himself sees these cases as a way to raise awareness about the existence of a new species. The debate revolves around whether AI systems can be considered creators and should be granted copyright and patent rights. Some argue that copyright requires human authorship, while others believe that intellectual property rights should be granted regardless of the involvement of a human inventor or author. The outcome of these legal battles could have significant implications for the future of AI-generated content and the definition of authorship.
UK publishers have called on the prime minister to protect authors' intellectual property rights in relation to artificial intelligence systems, as OpenAI argues that authors suing them for using their work to train AI systems have misconceived the scope of US copyright law.
Attorneys general from all 50 states have called on Congress to establish protective measures against AI-generated child sexual abuse images and expand existing restrictions on such materials. They argue that the government needs to act quickly to prevent the potentially harmful use of AI technology in creating child exploitation material.
The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in academia is raising concerns about cheating and copyright issues, but also offers potential benefits in personalized learning and critical analysis, according to educators. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) has released global guidance on the use of AI in education, urging countries to address data protection and copyright laws and ensure teachers have the necessary AI skills. While some students find AI helpful for basic tasks, they note its limitations in distinguishing fact from fiction and its reliance on internet scraping for information.
Microsoft has assured its commercial customers using AI Copilot services that they are protected against copyright claims if they adhere to safety measures, but personal use of Microsoft's AI services may not be legally covered for copyright infringement.
Microsoft will pay legal damages on behalf of customers using its artificial intelligence products if they are sued for copyright infringement for the output generated by such systems, as long as customers use the built-in "guardrails and content filters" to reduce the likelihood of generating infringing content.
Congressman Clay Higgins (R-LA) plans to introduce legislation prohibiting the use of artificial intelligence (AI) by the federal government for law enforcement purposes, in response to the Internal Revenue Service's recently announced AI-driven tax enforcement initiative.
Adobe has joined other companies in committing to safe AI development and has proposed a federal anti-impersonation law that would allow creators to seek damages from individuals using AI to impersonate them or their style for commercial purposes, which would make the impersonator, not the tool's vendor, the target of legal action.
New initiatives and regulators are taking action against false information online, just as artificial intelligence poses a greater threat to the problem.
Google will require political advertisements that use artificial intelligence to disclose the use of AI-generated content, in order to prevent misleading and predatory campaign ads.
Microsoft will assume responsibility for potential legal risks arising from copyright infringement claims related to the use of its AI products and will provide indemnification coverage to customers.
The iconic entertainment site, The A.V. Club, received backlash for publishing AI-generated articles that were found to be copied verbatim from IMDb, raising concerns about the use of AI in journalism and its potential impact on human jobs.
A surge in AI-generated child sexual abuse material (CSAM) circulating online has been observed by the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF), raising concerns about the ability to identify and protect real children in need. Efforts are being made by law enforcement and policymakers to address the growing issue of deepfake content created using generative AI platforms, including the introduction of legislation in the US to prevent the use of deceptive AI in elections.
California lawmakers have introduced a bill that would protect actors and artists from being replaced by digital clones created using artificial intelligence technology in response to concerns about the potential impact on entertainment jobs.
The generative AI boom has led to a "shadow war for data," as AI companies scrape information from the internet without permission, sparking a backlash among content creators and raising concerns about copyright and licensing in the AI world.
Amazon will require publishers who use AI-generated content to disclose their use of the technology, small businesses are set to benefit from AI and cloud technologies, and President Biden warns the UN about the potential risks of AI governance, according to the latest AI technology advancements reported by Fox News.
High-profile songwriters are meeting with Congressmen to advocate for legislation protecting musicians' copyrights in the face of the rapid rise of artificial intelligence (AI) in the music industry. The industry wants clear legislation that requires permission from copyright holders to use pre-existing songs to train AI for generating new music.
The Authors Guild, representing prominent fiction authors, has filed a lawsuit against OpenAI, alleging copyright infringement and the unauthorized use of their works to train AI models like ChatGPT, which generates summaries and analyses of their novels, interfering with their economic prospects. This case could determine the legality of using copyrighted material to train AI systems.
The US Copyright Office has ruled for the third time that AI-generated art cannot be copyrighted, raising questions about whether AI-generated art is categorically excluded from copyright protection or if human creators should be listed as the image's creator. The office's position, which is based on existing copyright doctrine, has been criticized for being unscalable and a potential quagmire, as it fails to consider the creative choices made by AI systems similar to those made by human photographers.
