Jason Peterson’s Post

In this article, I join my Cooley LLP colleagues Chris Coulter, Bartholomäus Regenhardt, Loriane Sangaré, and Zhijing Yu, to discuss the current state of the law around the world regarding whether generative AI outputs are capable of copyright ownership.

They won't regulate, but how much longer can the UK government sit on its hands in (not) encouraging innovation in AI? Through the Intellectual Property Office UK, the government convenes a committee from various industries and interest groups, and: "... the group of industry executives convened by the IPO that oversees the work has been unable to agree on a voluntary code of practice, meaning that it has returned the responsibility back to officials at the Department for Science Innovation and Technology, according to multiple people familiar with the discussions. Officials in the Department of Digital, Culture, Media and Sport are also involved, they said. Representatives came from various arts and news organisations, including the BBC, the British Library and the Financial Times, and tech companies Microsoft, DeepMind and Stability.". Not going anywhere fast. General election later this year. Will the next government manage to do it better? #artificialintelligence #ai #copyright #copyrightlaw #copyrightworks #scraping #datasets #largelanguagemodels #generativeai #art #music #literature

New laws and regulations are coming with AI and voice cloning. To what extent do you think your voice is unique? This article was published three years ago, and today the media explodes debating legality, regulation and the extent to which copyright goes.

Contrary to VC-backed belief, AI protests from creative professionals is not about luddites losing jobs to superior machines. Creative professional organizations world wide express unanimous dismay over trampled property rights. The implicit value contract of the open internet and web platforms in the attention economy was content-for-exposure. Creators build audiences, Search aids discovery, platforms sell ads (and user data). The generative AI data sourcing rugpull, repeated by Midjourney, Stability AI, Adobe, Google, OpenAI, Microsoft, Dropbox and Meta over the past two years unilaterally ripped apart that contract, took hostage the collective creative output of humanity sourced outside its owners’ awareness, without warning or recourse, for direct market replacement use. They had all of the Public Domain and much of the Creative Commons to pick from and plenty of legitimate licensing options, but chose to go straight for the jugular of present-day professionals by way of hapless fans and pirate hoarders. Every sales and marketing channel with viewing copies for human consumption was raided for commercial data processing. The Copyright Alliance is a key stakeholder in this attempted civilization scale rights grab. They represent a wide and diverse ecosystem of creative and publishing professionals, many with little individual bargaining power or other political representation. Their compilation of commentary to the USCO from photographers, directors, publishers, recording companies etc is as good an intro as one can find to the views from the wronged side of this intellectual property rights heist of the century. If you rather close your ears and get on with your prompting, the gist of it is: you own what you make. Commercial use of your property requires license. These principles have survived over a century of tech innovation, through recurring flashes of piracy with every new gadget. They enable hugely productive economic sectors and, more crucially, an independent fourth estate. You may not care about artists losing jobs, but the flipside of that same technology is deepfakes, sludge floods and reality collapse. Is it worth it? Are its builders trustworthy? When technology co-creates rather than co-opts it can be a great force for good. I do believe that. This isn’t it. #degenerativeai #iprightsheistoftgecentury #artheistofthecentury #createdontscrape ========== Long version here: https://lnkd.in/dGarJskH now with narration!

This sums up my opinion on the web, that is, it was a rug pull bait and switch all along. At least Apple still champions the creatives that transform the world through their radiant tools, even though Apple charges a premium for it. That premium is worth it if prevents the eventual reality collapse that has been set in motion by the proliferation of content built on the backs of unprotected creatives. The only thing that is holding our current downtrodden loneliness epidemic together, is the empathetic and invigorating works of creatives that champion humanity and life in all things. Letting that throw away might spell the worst sin of our current tech handle of "move fast and break things" because reality might very well be broken as we know it! Choose the right thing by championing and fighting for the creatives, as that is all of us! ---- As an aside, Adobe is actually trying in its own interesting way to champion creative excellence with its "content credentials" initiative.

Repeal Section 512 and DMCA. No safe harbor for Big Tech and Big Media companies that hide behind antiquated and unfair regulation that enables infringers to literally steal from creatives and copyright owners .... NOW through the unauthorized training and use of A.I.. No more free passes! No safe harbor for Big Tech and Big Media. Repeal DMCA so there is some teeth to protecting the rights of creatives and copyright owners.

Ethical training and sourcing for AI is the biggest deal around right now.

This #IP/Decode Blog reviews how #artificialintelligence (#AI) may impact your business now and in the future. This year, the U.S. Copyright Office launched an AI initiative to explore the relationships between technology and human creativity. Learn more about how the office will use the information it gathers to inform #copyright #regulations and advise members of #Congress. Tom Brooke | Allysan Scatterday

The era of AI regulation begins! The White House's Executive Order addressing AI regulation, which calls in part for guidance from the U.S. Copyright Office and U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to tackle emerging AI-related issues, is explored by my colleagues, Lauren Gregory Leipold, Puya Partow-Navid and Owen Wolfe, in the Legal Update linked below. Stay tuned for further updates as we march into the AI future. #TeamSeyfarth #AIRegulation #IntellectualProperty #AIInnovation #SeyfarthLA https://lnkd.in/e4S8Dzc2

In our fourth AI Legal News Summer Roundup, we observe how creators and consumers strive to safeguard their content from AI models under copyright and privacy laws, while governments face a delicate balancing act in regulating AI development while fostering innovation. https://ow.ly/Flwi50PFNTE