The main topic of the article is the backlash against AI companies that use unauthorized creative work to train their models.
Key points:
1. The controversy surrounding Prosecraft, a linguistic analysis site that used scraped data from pirated books without permission.
2. The debate over fair use and copyright infringement in relation to AI projects.
3. The growing concern among writers and artists about the use of generative AI tools to replace human creative work and the push for individual control over how their work is used.
Main topic: Copyright protection for works created by artificial intelligence (AI)
Key points:
1. A federal judge upheld a finding from the U.S. Copyright Office that AI-generated art is not eligible for copyright protection.
2. The ruling emphasized that human authorship is a fundamental requirement for copyright protection.
3. The judge stated that copyright law protects only works of human creation and is not designed to extend to non-human actors like AI.
Main topic: The use of copyrighted books to train large language models in generative AI.
Key points:
1. Writers Sarah Silverman, Richard Kadrey, and Christopher Golden have filed a lawsuit alleging that Meta violated copyright laws by using their books to train LLaMA, a large language model.
2. Approximately 170,000 books, including works by Stephen King, Zadie Smith, and Michael Pollan, are part of the dataset used to train LLaMA and other generative-AI programs.
3. The use of pirated books in AI training raises concerns about the impact on authors and the control of intellectual property in the digital age.
I'm sorry, but as an AI language model, I cannot access or summarize specific copyrighted materials. I can generate summaries and provide information based on general knowledge and publicly available sources. If you have any other topic or question you'd like me to assist with, please feel free to ask.
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.
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 struggle between open-source and proprietary artificial intelligence (AI) systems is intensifying as large language models (LLMs) become a battleground for tech giants like Microsoft and Google, who are defending their proprietary technology against open-source alternatives like ChatGPT from OpenAI; while open-source AI advocates believe it will democratize access to AI tools, analysts express concern that commoditization of LLMs could erode the competitive advantage of proprietary models and impact the return on investment for companies like Microsoft.
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.
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.
The US Copyright Office has initiated a public comment period to explore the intersection of AI technology and copyright laws, including issues related to copyrighted materials used to train AI models, copyright protection for AI-generated content, liability for infringement, and the impact of AI mimicking human voices or styles. Comments can be submitted until November 15.
OpenAI is seeking the dismissal of claims made by authors and comedians in two separate lawsuits, which allege copyright infringement regarding the use of their books to train ChatGPT, while OpenAI argues that its usage falls under fair use and transformative interpretation of the original works.
“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.
The Guardian has blocked OpenAI from using its content for AI products like ChatGPT due to concerns about unlicensed usage, leading to lawsuits from writers and calls for intellectual property safeguards.
AI researcher Stephen Thaler argues that his AI creation, DABUS, should be able to hold copyright for its creations, but legal experts and courts have rejected the idea, stating that copyright requires human authorship.
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.
A group of U.S. authors, including Pulitzer Prize winner Michael Chabon, has filed a lawsuit against OpenAI, accusing the Microsoft-backed program of using their works without permission to train its chatbot ChatGPT, and seeking damages and an order to block OpenAI's business practices.
Meta is being sued by authors who claim that their copyrighted works were used without consent to train the company's Llama AI language tool.
Game of Thrones author George R.R. Martin and 16 other writers are suing OpenAI over its language model ChatGPT, accusing it of copyright infringement for using text from pirate e-book repositories without authorization.
Amazon has introduced new guidelines requiring publishers to disclose the use of AI in content submitted to its Kindle Direct Publishing platform, in an effort to curb unauthorized AI-generated books and copyright infringement. Publishers are now required to inform Amazon about AI-generated content, but AI-assisted content does not need to be disclosed. High-profile authors have recently joined a class-action lawsuit against OpenAI, the creator of the AI chatbot, for alleged copyright violations.
The European Union is warning about the risks posed by widely accessible generative AI tools in relation to disinformation and elections, calling on platforms to implement safeguards and urging ChatGPT maker OpenAI to take action to address these risks. The EU's voluntary Code of Practice on Disinformation is being used as a temporary measure until the upcoming AI Act is adopted, which will make user disclosures a legal requirement for AI technologies.
Media mogul Barry Diller criticizes generative artificial intelligence and calls for a redefinition of fair use to protect published material from being captured in AI knowledge-bases, following lawsuits against OpenAI for copyright infringement by prominent authors, and amidst a tentative labor agreement between Hollywood writers and studios.
Authors are having their books pirated and used by artificial intelligence systems without their consent, with lawsuits being filed against companies like Meta who have fed a massive book database into their AI system without permission, putting authors out of business and making the AI companies money.
Summary: OpenAI's ChatGPT has received major updates, including image recognition, speech-to-text and text-to-speech capabilities, and integration with browsing the internet, while a new contract protects Hollywood writers from AI automation and ensures AI-generated material is not considered source material for creative works; however, a privacy expert advises against using ChatGPT for therapy due to concerns about personal information being used as training data and the lack of empathy and liability in AI chatbots.
Big tech firms, including Google and Microsoft, are engaged in a competition to acquire content and data for training AI models, according to Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, who testified in an antitrust trial against Google and highlighted the race for content among tech firms. Microsoft has committed to assuming copyright liability for users of its AI-powered Copilot, addressing concerns about the use of copyrighted materials in training AI models.
Summary: The use of pirated books to train artificial intelligence systems has raised concerns among authors, as AI-generated content becomes more prevalent in various fields, including education and the workplace. The battle between humans and machines has already begun, with authors trying to fight back through legal actions and Hollywood industry professionals protecting their work from AI.
Tech companies like Meta, Google, and Microsoft are facing lawsuits from authors who accuse them of using their copyrighted books to train AI systems without permission or compensation, prompting a call for writers to band together and demand fair compensation for their work.
Generative AI systems, trained on copyrighted material scraped from the internet, are facing lawsuits from artists and writers concerned about copyright infringement and privacy violations. The lack of transparency regarding data sources also raises concerns about data bias in AI models. Protecting data from AI is challenging, with limited tools available, and removing copyrighted or sensitive information from AI models would require costly retraining. Companies currently have little incentive to address these issues due to the absence of AI policies or legal rulings.
Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee and other authors have filed a lawsuit against Meta, Microsoft, and other companies, alleging that their books were pirated and used without permission to train AI models, in the latest case of authors accusing tech companies of copyright infringement in relation to AI training data.
