JEM Lab for Generative AI at Work’s Post

#GenerativeAI skirts copyright laws and outdated legal ideas, allowing billion-dollar enterprises and large language models to wantonly infringe on authors and creators. A decade ago, a company had to own the data it trained an AI construct. It cost them money, and rightly so. Unfortunately, companies have spent millions upon millions on court battles and lobbyists to erode our copyrights. Worse still, they have forged ahead and interpreted the law for themselves, deciding that theft of works to train generative AI is "fair use" when they know full well that it isn't. With the Veracity Mark™ "Enjoined" symbol, AI systems are specifically and publicly denied the use of any work it is affixed for purposes of training a generative AI – eliminating any ambiguity. Get to know your Veracity Marks at www.veracitymark.com #newyorktimes

⚖️ LLMs & Copyright: Striking a Balance in the AI Age ⚖️ #AI #Copyright #OpenAI #Ethics **OpenAI's recent plea (Jan) to the UK Parliament sparks a crucial debate: can AI innovation thrive without infringing on creative rights? ** The company argues that using copyrighted materials is essential for training advanced AI models. They claim that more than public domain data is needed, raising concerns about the limitations of current copyright frameworks in the AI era. However, voices like the New York Times and Authors Guild counter, highlighting potential misuse and infringement impacting intellectual property and author livelihoods. Finding a balanced solution is critical. ** Points to ponder:** Can fair use principles adapt to AI training needs? Should specific licenses be created for AI data utilization? How can we ensure ethical and responsible AI development? This isn't just a legal issue; it's a societal one. We need open dialogue and collaboration to harness AI's potential while respecting creative rights. **What are your thoughts on this complex issue? Share your perspective in the comments! ** #StayInformed #FutureofAI #LetsTalk https://lnkd.in/gG5XHWiy

OpenAI Scores Major Win in AI Copyright Lawsuit!! A New York federal judge has dismissed a copyright lawsuit filed by news sites Raw Story and AlterNet against OpenAI, ruling the plaintiffs did not show concrete harm from OpenAI's use of their articles in AI training. Judge Colleen McMahon emphasized that ChatGPT generates synthesized, non-identical responses rather than directly copying content, supporting OpenAI’s fair use defense. The decision underscores that factual content isn’t protected by copyright, and instances where ChatGPT copied text verbatim were cited as rare bugs, not intended functions. This ruling could set a new standard for copyright battles in AI, strengthening OpenAI’s position in similar cases like the New York Times lawsuit, which challenges the unauthorized use of its content for AI training. The judge’s stance on synthesized AI responses versus direct copying could become a critical factor in ongoing and future disputes, especially as copyright laws seek to adapt to AI’s rapid evolution. Image Source: Meta AI For more such AI updates that is actually useful, subscribe to our newsletter (69K+ subscribers have already grabbed the offer)- https://lnkd.in/d5UrNVtT #ai #artficialintelligence #googleai #googledeepmind #ainews #aitutorials #aiforbusiness #aiinnovation #aitech #agi #genai #googleupdates #aiupdates #ainewsletter #openai #chatgpt #chatgpt4 #metai

The conversation about fair use in AI training is heating up, especially after insights from former OpenAI researcher Suchir Balaji. He questions whether AI companies truly respect copyright laws when using data for training. Stanford law professor Mark Lemley argues that most AI-generated content is different enough from the sources to avoid copyright infringement. However, this debate highlights a significant gap in our legal framework as it struggles to keep pace with rapidly evolving technology. To navigate these complexities, there’s a strong call for lawmakers to establish comprehensive regulations that address the unique challenges posed by AI. With Lyle Gravatt at Michael Best & Friedrich LLP. #AI #Copyright #IntellectualProperty #Legal

Human creators know to decline requests to produce content that violates copyright. But can AI companies build similar guardrails into generative AI? According to a recent article in The Conversation, there are currently no established approaches or public tools for building such guardrails. Even if they were available, they could put an excessive burden on users and content providers. Policymakers and regulation may be necessary to ensure best practices for copyright safety in generative AI. #AI #copyright #policy #regulation

In the rapidly evolving field of AI, the intersection of technology and copyright law is becoming increasingly prominent. A recent situation with OpenAI's GPT Store has shed light on the complexities of copyright complaints within AI-generated content. This development underscores the importance of establishing clear guidelines and protections for intellectual property in the age of AI. As professionals in the field, we must advocate for responsible AI development that respects creators' rights while fostering innovation. Understanding and addressing these challenges are crucial for building trust and accountability in AI technologies.

🚀 Navigating the Legal Landscape of AI: Insights & Opportunities In the rapidly evolving world of artificial intelligence, the intersection of AI and copyright law is becoming increasingly complex. A recent lawsuit by The New York Times against OpenAI has sparked significant debate within the AI community, highlighting the need for a deeper understanding of copyright laws and their implications for AI development. 🔍 Key Takeaways: - The lawsuit centers around the use of copyrighted materials to train AI models, with OpenAI arguing that such use constitutes fair use. - Historical precedents, such as Google's book scanning project, provide a backdrop for these arguments, but AI companies may find themselves on shakier legal ground. - The case of MP3.com, a music-streaming service crushed by copyright litigation, serves as a cautionary tale for AI developers. 🤔 Why This Matters: The legal landscape of AI is still being charted, and understanding these complexities is crucial for anyone involved in AI development. Whether you're creating new AI tools or integrating AI into your business, staying informed and proactive about legal considerations is key. 🔗 Explore More: For a deeper dive into the nuances of this lawsuit and its implications for the AI community: https://smpl.is/8pcvl At GAI, we're committed to empowering you with the knowledge and tools to navigate the complex world of AI. Join us in exploring the future of AI, responsibly and innovatively. #AI #CopyrightLaw #OpenAI #LegalChallenges #Innovation #artificialintelligence #copyrightlaws #copyrightlitigation #technologylaw #techpolicy

Back in 2023, #OPENAI told the UK parliament that it was “impossible” to train leading AI models without using copyrighted materials. OpenAI and other leading players have used whatever materials they are able to access online to train their models (including for code generation), triggering a wave of lawsuits alleging copyright infringement. But is that really the only way? At Tabnine, we don't believe so. And two announcements this week add even more support for the idea that large language models can be well trained without the permissionless use of copyrighted materials. https://lnkd.in/g75evb_4 #AI #GenerativeAI #GenAI #AICodingAssistants #Copyright #IntellectualProperty #AIEthics #OpenSource

Revealing the sources of Generative AI to protect creators The US is pushing forward with a copyright disclosure bill which is designed to protect the interests of creators. There has been a whole series of challenges to Generative AI applications and companies which have been accused of 'theft' by training their datasets on content which is copyrighted. Some organisations like the FT, for example, recently reached agreements with OpenAI which recognises the value of their journalism as a source for AI applications. One of the complications is that some copyright challenges have failed as AI developers have successfully argued that they are not 'stealing data' instead their systems are merely learning from it. A US bill is pushing for greater transparency around the sources of information that AI systems are trained on. It could be argued that they are fighting back for human creators. The Bill appears to have been well received and creates some innovative ideas. Disclosure of sources is critical for a range of reasons: recognising the rights of the creator and also there are some large organisations who are frankly a bit queasy about taking on AI systems when they don't know what data they have been trained on and whether it is laden with potentially reputation damaging content which could surface at some stage and/or unfairly influence decisions or have a discriminatory impact on functionality. New technology cannot be wished away. It is here to stay and in so far as the likes of chat gpt are pioneering and are opening up new frontiers of knowledge and possibilities. Regulation and legislation has to do the same. It looks like templates for transparency -keeping humans in the loop are becoming clearer. These are themes that we are regularly covering at our AI sessions at the Digital Leadership Forum. And through our training sessions and knowledge sharing sessions. #AI #ArtificialIntelligence #CopyrightLaw #Copyright #USPolicy #TechPolicy #ContentCreation #Innovation #GenerativeAI #AICopyright #AItransparency #SchiffBill #FutureOfWork #ContentRights #ContentOwnership #Creativity #whosonthehook #AIethics #AIregulation #whosgettingpaid #ai #aiforgood #innovation #legalai #copyright #humansintheloop #thedigitalleadershipforum

In a precedent setting legal battle, OpenAI finds itself at odds with The New York Times over allegations of copyright infringement. At the heart of the dispute is the claim that OpenAI used vast amounts of copyrighted material to train its AI systems, including the renowned ChatGPT, without proper authorisation. OpenAI countered by accusing NYT of engaging in deceptive practices, allegedly "hacking" ChatGPT to produce evidence for the lawsuit. This raises critical questions about the ethical use of AI technology, the boundaries of fair use in the digital age, and the potential impact on content creators and publishers. OpenAI have previously struck deals with other outlets, for example, Axel Springer which owns POLITICO and Business Insider, to use their content. However, there have been questions around the scale of payments, given the extensive use the organisations' content will undergo as a part of training in these AI models. Competition Policy International - OpenAI Accuses New York Times of ‘Hacking’ ChatGPT in Copyright Lawsuit - https://lnkd.in/dSbvY7jJ Euronews - ChatGPT owner OpenAI strikes deal with news publishers to use content to train its AI - https://lnkd.in/duY3b6Ru The Verge - OpenAI’s news publisher deals reportedly top out at $5 million a year - https://lnkd.in/dd5chQRf #ethicalai #responsibleai #genai #copyright #content #dispute #legalai #legal #ownership