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.
Generative AI is starting to impact the animation and visual effects industry, with companies like Base Media exploring its potentials, but concerns about job security and copyright infringement remain.
AI labeling, or disclosing that content was generated using artificial intelligence, is not deemed necessary by Google for ranking purposes; the search engine values quality content, user experience, and authority of the website and author more than the origin of the content. However, human editors are still crucial for verifying facts and adding a human touch to AI-generated content to ensure its quality, and as AI becomes more widespread, policies and frameworks around its use may evolve.
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.
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.
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.
A federal judge rejected an inventor's attempt to copyright an artwork generated by artificial intelligence, sparking a broader legal discussion on authorship and intellectual property rights.
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.
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.
“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 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.
AI is a topic of concern and fascination within the music industry, as musicians and composers grapple with the potential benefits and threats it poses to their work, with tools already available that enable the creation of professional-sounding original compositions, but with debates surrounding the authenticity and copyright of AI-generated music.
AI writing detectors cannot reliably distinguish between AI-generated and human-generated content, as acknowledged by OpenAI in a recent FAQ, leading to false positives when used for punishment in education.
Summary:
Artificial intelligence (AI) risks further exploitation and misrepresentation of Indigenous art, as well as encroaching on Indigenous rights, unless Indigenous people are involved in creating AI and deciding its scope, and Indigenous data sovereignty is respected.
The Colorado State Fair has amended its rules to require artists to disclose if they used artificial intelligence (AI) to create their submissions after controversy arose when an AI-generated artwork won first place in the fair's digital arts competition last year.
AI-generated images in Copy Magazine reveal the uncanny perfection of fashion photography and serve as a warning to break free from repeating past styles, prompting questions about ethics and copyright in AI image generation.
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.
The rise of easily accessible artificial intelligence is leading to an influx of AI-generated goods, including self-help books, wall art, and coloring books, which can be difficult to distinguish from authentic, human-created products, leading to scam products and potential harm to real artists.
A student named Edward Tian created a tool called GPTZero that aims to detect AI-generated text and combat AI plagiarism, sparking a debate about the future of AI-generated content and the need for AI detection tools; however, the accuracy and effectiveness of such tools are still in question.
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.
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.
