The main topic of the article is Kickstarter's struggle to formulate a policy regarding the use of generative AI on its platform. The key points are:
1. Generative AI tools used on Kickstarter have been trained on publicly available content without giving credit or compensation to the original creators.
2. Kickstarter is requiring projects using AI tools to disclose relevant details about how the AI content will be used and which parts are original.
3. New projects involving the development of AI tech must detail the sources of training data and implement safeguards for content creators.
4. Kickstarter's new policy will go into effect on August 29 and will be enforced through a new set of questions during project submissions.
5. Projects that do not properly disclose their use of AI may be suspended.
6. Kickstarter has been considering changes in policy around generative AI since December and has faced challenges in moderating AI works.
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.
A federal judge ruled that AI-generated art is not eligible for copyright protection in the US due to the absence of human authorship.
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.
AI-generated inventions need to be allowed patent protection to encourage innovation and maximize social benefits, as current laws hinder progress in biomedicine; jurisdictions around the world have differing approaches to patenting AI-generated inventions, and the US falls behind in this area, highlighting the need for legislative action.
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.
The U.S. is falling behind in regulating artificial intelligence (AI), while Europe has passed the world's first comprehensive AI law; President Joe Biden recently met with industry leaders to discuss the need for AI regulation and companies pledged to develop safeguards for AI-generated content and prioritize user privacy.
Hollywood studios are considering the use of generative AI tools, such as ChatGPT, to assist in screenwriting, but concerns remain regarding copyright protection for works solely created by AI, as they currently are not copyrightable.
Major media organizations are calling for new laws to protect their content from being used by AI tools without permission, expressing concerns over unauthorized scraping and the potential for AI to produce false or biased information.
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.
Artificial intelligence (AI) is seen as a tool that can inspire and collaborate with human creatives in the movie and TV industry, but concerns remain about copyright and ethical issues, according to Greg Harrison, chief creative officer at MOCEAN. Although AI has potential for visual brainstorming and automation of non-creative tasks, it should be used cautiously and in a way that values human creativity and culture.
The AI Stage agenda at TechCrunch Disrupt 2023 features discussions on topics such as AI valuations, ethical AI, AI in the cloud, AI-generated disinformation, robotics and self-driving cars, AI in movies and games, generative text AI, and real-world case studies of AI-powered industries.
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.
The UK government has been urged to introduce new legislation to regulate artificial intelligence (AI) in order to keep up with the European Union (EU) and the United States, as the EU advances with the AI Act and US policymakers publish frameworks for AI regulations. The government's current regulatory approach risks lagging behind the fast pace of AI development, according to a report by the science, innovation, and technology committee. The report highlights 12 governance challenges, including bias in AI systems and the production of deepfake material, that need to be addressed in order to guide the upcoming global AI safety summit at Bletchley Park.
“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.
Dezeen, an online architecture and design resource, has outlined its policy on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in text and image generation, stating that while they embrace new technology, they do not publish stories that use AI-generated text unless it is focused on AI and clearly labeled as such, and they favor publishing human-authored illustrations over AI-generated images.
The use of AI in the entertainment industry, such as body scans and generative AI systems, raises concerns about workers' rights, intellectual property, and the potential for broader use of AI in other industries, infringing on human connection and privacy.
The United States Copyright Office has launched a study on artificial intelligence (AI) and copyright law, seeking public input on various policy issues and exploring topics such as AI training, copyright liability, and authorship. Other U.S. government agencies, including the SEC, USPTO, and DHS, have also initiated inquiries and public forums on AI, highlighting its impact on innovation, governance, and public policy.
Microsoft's new policy offers broad copyright protections to users of its AI assistant Copilot, promising to assume responsibility for any legal risks related to copyright claims and to defend and pay for any adverse judgments or settlements from such lawsuits.
AI systems are becoming increasingly adept at turning text into realistic and believable speech, raising questions about the ethical implications and responsibilities associated with creating and using these AI voices.
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.
A bipartisan group of senators is expected to introduce legislation to create a government agency to regulate AI and require AI models to obtain a license before deployment, a move that some leading technology companies have supported; however, critics argue that licensing regimes and a new AI regulator could hinder innovation and concentrate power among existing players, similar to the undesirable economic consequences seen in Europe.
Governments worldwide are grappling with the challenge of regulating artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, as countries like Australia, Britain, China, the European Union, France, G7 nations, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Spain, the United Nations, and the United States take steps to establish regulations and guidelines for AI usage.
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.
AI technology has the potential to assist writers in generating powerful and moving prose, but it also raises complex ethical and artistic questions about the future of literature.
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 use of generative AI poses risks to businesses, including the potential exposure of sensitive information, the generation of false information, and the potential for biased or toxic responses from chatbots. Additionally, copyright concerns and the complexity of these systems further complicate the landscape.
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.
