UK Arts and Media Reject Plan To Let AI Firms Use Copyrighted Material (theguardian.com)
(Thursday December 19, 2024 @11:56AM (msmash)
from the no-dice dept.)
- Reference: 0175702273
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/24/12/19/166220/uk-arts-and-media-reject-plan-to-let-ai-firms-use-copyrighted-material
- Source link: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/dec/19/uk-arts-and-media-reject-plan-to-let-ai-firms-use-copyrighted-material
Writers, publishers, musicians, photographers, movie producers and newspapers have rejected the Labour government's plan to [1]create a copyright exemption to help AI companies train their algorithms. From a report:
> In a joint statement, bodies representing thousands of creatives dismissed the proposal made by ministers on Tuesday that would allow companies such as Open AI, Google and Meta to train their AI systems on published works unless their owners actively opt out.
>
> The Creative Rights in AI Coalition (Crac) said existing copyright laws must be respected and enforced rather than degraded. The coalition includes the British Phonographic Industry, the Independent Society of Musicians, the Motion Picture Association and the Society of Authors as well as Mumsnet, the Guardian, Financial Times, Telegraph, Getty Images, the Daily Mail Group and Newsquest.
>
> Their intervention comes a day after the technology and culture minister Chris Bryant told parliament the proposed system, subject to a 10-week consultation, would "improve access to content by AI developers, whilst allowing rights holders to control how their content is used for AI training."
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/dec/19/uk-arts-and-media-reject-plan-to-let-ai-firms-use-copyrighted-material
> In a joint statement, bodies representing thousands of creatives dismissed the proposal made by ministers on Tuesday that would allow companies such as Open AI, Google and Meta to train their AI systems on published works unless their owners actively opt out.
>
> The Creative Rights in AI Coalition (Crac) said existing copyright laws must be respected and enforced rather than degraded. The coalition includes the British Phonographic Industry, the Independent Society of Musicians, the Motion Picture Association and the Society of Authors as well as Mumsnet, the Guardian, Financial Times, Telegraph, Getty Images, the Daily Mail Group and Newsquest.
>
> Their intervention comes a day after the technology and culture minister Chris Bryant told parliament the proposed system, subject to a 10-week consultation, would "improve access to content by AI developers, whilst allowing rights holders to control how their content is used for AI training."
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/dec/19/uk-arts-and-media-reject-plan-to-let-ai-firms-use-copyrighted-material
What's next? (Score:3)
...prohibiting art students from studying published work?
ALL human training is done by studying the work of others
Re: (Score:2)
Fine. Then make all AI models free to use in perpetuity. Server costs? Training costs? Development costs? All free, forever.
You can't make one argument that it's just "training" and "studying" the works of others, and then justify that it should be a sold product for profit, because the AI company used that data for free, without compensation. So why should they get to repackage it and sell it?
Okay, so you argue that the AI company had to pay to develop the model, so they did something original by cre