Generative AI meets copyright; Science, July 13, 2023

PAMELA SAMUELSON, Science; Generative AI meets copyright

"Generative artificial intelligence (AI) is a disruptive technology that is widely adopted by members of the general public as well as scientists and technologists who are enthusiastic about the potential to accelerate research in a wide variety of fields. But some professional artists, writers, and programmers fiercely object to the use of their creations as training data for generative AI systems and to outputs that may compete with or displace their works (1, 2). Lack of attribution and compensation for use of their original creations are other sources of aggravation to critics of generative AI. Copyright lawsuits that are now underway in the United States have substantial implications for the future of generative AI systems. If the plaintiffs prevail, the only generative AI systems that may be lawful in the United States would be those trained on public domain works or under licenses, which will affect everyone who deploys generative AI, integrates it into their products, and uses it for scientific research."

International Copyright Issues and Artificial Intelligence; U.S. Copyright Office, Webinar: Wednesday, July 26, 2023, 11:00 a.m.–1:00 p.m. eastern time

 U.S. Copyright Office; International Copyright Issues and Artificial Intelligence Webinar

"The United States is not alone in facing challenging questions about artificial intelligence and its implications for copyright law and policy. On July 26, 2023, join the Copyright Office for a discussion on global perspectives on copyright and AI. Leading international experts will discuss how other countries are approaching copyright questions such as authorship, training, exceptions and limitations, and infringement. They will provide an overview of legislative developments in other regions and highlight possible areas of convergence and divergence involving generative AI.

This webinar is a part of the Copyright Office’s initiative to examine copyright law and policy issues raised by AI technology, including the scope of copyright in works generated using AI tools and the use of copyrighted materials in AI training. For more on copyright and AI, visit copyright.gov/ai.

Time: July 26, 2023, 11:00 a.m.–1:00 p.m. eastern time

Speakers:

• Jane Ginsburg, Columbia Law School
• Andres Guadamuz, University of Sussex
• Bernt Hugenholtz, University of Amsterdam
• Matthew Sag, Emory University School of Law
• Luca Schirru, KU Leuven
• Marcus von Welser, Vossius
• Raquel Xalabarder Plantada, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya
• Shlomit Yanisky-Ravid, Ono Academic College
• Peter Yu, Texas A&M University School of Law"

ChatGPT and Generative AI Are Hits! Can Copyright Law Stop Them?; Bloomberg Law, June 26, 2023

Kirby Ferguson, Bloomberg Law; ChatGPT and Generative AI Are Hits! Can Copyright Law Stop Them?

"Getty Images, a top supplier of visual content for license, has sued two of the leading companies offering generative AI tools. Will intellectual property laws spell doom for the burgeoning generative AI business? We explore the brewing battle over copyright and AI in this video. 

Video features: 

• Riddhi Setty, Bloomberg Law IP reporter
• Ian B. Crosby, Susman Godfrey partner
• Mark A. Lemley, Standford Law School professor of tech and IP law"

Generative AI is a minefield for copyright law; The Conversation, June 15, 2023

Robert Mahari JD-PhD Student, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Jessica Fjeld
Lecturer on Law, Harvard Law School, Ziv Epstein PhD Student in Media Arts and Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), The Conversation; ; Generative AI is a minefield for copyright law 

"While copyright law tends to favor an all-or-nothing approach, scholars at Harvard Law School have proposed new models of joint ownership that allow artists to gain some rights in outputs that resemble their works.

In many ways, generative AI is yet another creative tool that allows a new group of people access to image-making, just like cameras, paintbrushes or Adobe Photoshop. But a key difference is this new set of tools relies explicitly on training data, and therefore creative contributions cannot easily be traced back to a single artist. 

The ways in which existing laws are interpreted or reformed – and whether generative AI is appropriately treated as the tool it is – will have real consequences for the future of creative expression."

Generative AI is a minefield for copyright law; The Conversation, June 15, 2023

Robert Mahari JD-PhD Student, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Jessica Fjeld, Lecturer on Law, Harvard Law School, Ziv Epstein, PhD Student in Media Arts and Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), The Conversation; ; Generative AI is a minefield for copyright law

"We’re part of a team of 14 experts across disciplines that just published a paper on generative AI in Science magazine. In it, we explore how advances in AI will affect creative work, aesthetics and the media. One of the key questions that emerged has to do with U.S. copyright laws, and whether they can adequately deal with the unique challenges of generative AI.

Copyright laws were created to promote the arts and creative thinking. But the rise of generative AI has complicated existing notions of authorship."

Can you copyright the content you make with generative AI?; Descript via Fast Company, June 14, 2023

BRANDON COPPLE—DESCRIPT via Fast Company; Can you copyright the content you make with generative AI?

"So if you’re using generative AI tools to create any part of your content— the cover art for your podcast, the background for your video, anything— the best thing you can do is to be sure you’re employing as much human creativity in the process as possible. This might mean writing prompts with as much detail as possible—well beyond just suggesting ideas. You’ll want to be able to show you had a specific expression of your ideas in mind, and you just used the AI as a tool to generate it...

Of course, the line between what is merely an idea and what’s a specific expression of that idea is subjective, so it may be difficult to know whether what you have added rises to the level of something protectable. We can probably expect things to remain fairly murky, at least for a while. 

For now, Lisa warns that it is important to be aware that even highly detailed involvement in the process may not be sufficient to make the output protectible, as the Copyright Office has seemingly set a very high bar. So there may not be much you can to do prevent others from copying AI-generated output. That’s a key consideration when you’re deciding where and how to use generative AI in your creative process.

A final note: as Lisa points out, the Copyright Office did indicate that if someone sufficiently modifies generated output, that could be protectable. So, if you’re using generative AI as a starting point—e.g., using ChatGPT to create a rough draft and then rewriting it for your own voice—be sure you document the changes you made before you try to file for copyright protection, and then explain it in the application."

Generative AI Debate Braces for Post-Warhol Fair Use Impact; Bloomberg Law, May 30, 2023

Isaiah Poritz , Bloomberg Law; Generative AI Debate Braces for Post-Warhol Fair Use Impact

"While the courts may take years to decide whether generative AI models are fair use, the litigation underway is many steps ahead of Congress, which hasn’t yet enacted legislation to regulate the burgeoning technology. In the meantime, some observers see peril for the AI industry.

“Copyright law is the only law that’s already in existence that could bring generative AI systems to their knees,” Pamela Samuelson, a copyright law professor at the University of California Berkeley, said at a lecture on AI last month. “If the court says ingesting is infringement, the whole thing can be destroyed.”

Generative AI: Ethical, Legal, and Technical Questions; Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, Santa Clara University, Tuesday, May 16, 2023 12 Noon Pacific/3 PM Eastern

 

Join us May 16th at noon for an online panel discussion on ethical, legal, and technical questions related to generative AI.

Generative AI: Ethical, Legal, and Technical Questions   Noon to 1:00 p.m. Pacific Tuesday, May 16, 2023   "As artists, composers, and other “content creators” and intellectual property owners use generative AI tools or decry their development, many legal and ethical issues arise. In this panel discussion, a copyright law expert, an AI researcher who is also a composer and music performer, and a multi-disciplinary visual artist (all of whom teach at Santa Clara University) will address some of those questions–from training data collection to fair use, impact on creativity and creative labor, the balancing of various rights, and our ability to assess and respond to fast-moving technologies."

Register to Attend the Webinar

EU proposes new copyright rules for generative AI; Reuters, April 28, 2023

 

Supantha Mukherjee

, Foo Yun Chee

 and Martin Coulter, 

Reuters; EU proposes new copyright rules for generative AI

"Companies deploying generative AI tools, such as ChatGPT, will have to disclose any copyrighted material used to develop their systems, according to an early EU agreement that could pave the way for the world's first comprehensive laws governing the technology."

The Andy Warhol Copyright Case That Could Transform Generative AI; Wired, April 25, 2023

MADELINE ASHBY , Wired; The Andy Warhol Copyright Case That Could Transform Generative AI

"“Copyright is a monopoly, and fair use is the safety valve,” says Art Neill, director of the New Media Rights Program at California Western School of Law. Everything from true-crime podcasts to Twitter dunks rely on fair use. It’s the doctrine that makes possible every “ENDING EXPLAINED!!1!” video you’ve watched after killing a bottle of pinot on Sunday night. It’s also why Americans can share videos of police brutality. Cara Gagliano, staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, calls it “a particularly important tool for anyone who speaks truth to power.” The EFF filed an amicus brief in the case, siding with the Warhol Foundation. “It protects your right to criticize and critique the works of others.”"

Who Owns a Song Created by A.I.?; The New York Times, April 15, 2023

Ephrat Livni, Lauren Hirsch and Sarah Kessler The New York Times; Who Owns a Song Created by A.I.?

"Who owns the output of generative A.I.? For now, only a human’s work can be copyrighted, but what about work that partly relies on generative A.I.? Some tool developers have said they won’t assert copyright over content generated by their machines. In February, the Copyright Office rejected a copyright for A.I.-generated images in a graphic novel, though the writer argued that she had made the images via “a creative, iterative process” that involved “composition, selection, arrangement, cropping and editing for each image.” The government compared use of the A.I. tool to hiring an artist. But the lines may blur as the use of such tools becomes more common. Like the tools, the intellectual property issues are a work in progress that will only get more complex."

Generative AI Has an Intellectual Property Problem; Harvard Business Review, April 7, 2023

Gil Appel, Juliana Neelbauer, and David A. Schweidel, Harvard Business Review; Generative AI Has an Intellectual Property Problem

"This isn’t the first time technology and copyright law have crashed into each other. Google successfully defended itself against a lawsuit by arguing that transformative use allowed for the scraping of text from books to create its search engine, and for the time being, this decision remains precedential.

But there are other, non-technological cases that could shape how the products of generative AI are treated. A case before the U.S. Supreme Court against the Andy Warhol Foundation — brought by photographer Lynn Goldsmith, who had licensed an image of the late musician, Prince— could refine U.S. copyright law on the issue of when a piece of art is sufficiently different from its source material to become unequivocally “transformative,” and whether a court can consider the meaning of the derivative work when it evaluates that transformation. If the court finds that the Warhol piece is not a fair use, it could mean trouble for AI-generated works.

All this uncertainty presents a slew of challenges for companies that use generative AI. There are risks regarding infringement — direct or unintentional — in contracts that are silent on generative AI usage by their vendors and customers. If a business user is aware that training data might include unlicensed works or that an AI can generate unauthorized derivative works not covered by fair use, a business could be on the hook for willful infringement, which can include damages up to $150,000 for each instance of knowing use. There’s also the risk of accidentally sharing confidential trade secrets or business information by inputting data into generative AI tools."

AI Trained on Copyrighted Works: When Is It Fair Use?; Lexology, January 16, 2023

Diana Bikbaeva - Diana Bikbaeva, Lexology; AI Trained on Copyrighted Works: When Is It Fair Use?

"We recently published an article that got much traction about whether machine learning on copyrighted materials is fair use. We now offer a deep analysis with new ideas and suggestions on legal risk mitigation and principles for more ethical AI systems.

AI is still a relatively new, although rapidly evolving technology, and some of its legal implications (especially in copyright law) remain a gray area, creating uncertainty on its use and development.

AI and machine learning technology are not one-size-fits-all and have diverse structures and algorithms specific to the tasks they are programmed to solve. So, any discussion of the legal implications of machine learning and resulting artificial intelligence needs to avoid sweeping conclusions on the technology in general and should consider the underlying technology and its treatment of copyrighted materials on a case-by-case basis."

Generative AI, Andy Warhol ‘Fair Use’ Lead 2023 Copyright Issues; Bloomberg Law, December 28, 2022

Isaiah Poritz, Bloomberg Law; Generative AI, Andy Warhol ‘Fair Use’ Lead 2023 Copyright Issues

"How copyright law applies to the fast-growing generative artificial intelligence industry, and the US Supreme Court’s ruling in a case concerning Andy Warhol’s artistic use of a photograph of Prince are among the most important copyright issues heading into 2023.

Other major copyright cases in the new year include the high court’s expected decision on whether to hear a multimillion-dollar dispute involving allegations that Google LLC illegally scraped lyrics from the crowd-sourced lyric annotation website Genius. 

“Never before has content and intellectual property been so important and we are starting to see that now in terms of the Supreme Court’s docket,” said copyright attorney Scott Burroughs of the firm Doniger Burroughs PC, which helped write a friend-of-the-court brief asking the justices to take the lyrics case.

In one of the most active federal appeals courts for copyright law, two photographers are challenging the 15-year-old “server test.” That precedent holds that a website displaying an embedded Instagram post can’t be held liable for copyright infringement because the image isn’t hosted on the website’s servers." 

 JAMES VINCENT, The Verge; The scary truth about AI copyright is nobody knows what will happen next

"...is any of this actually legal?

The question arises because of the way generative AI systems are trained. Like most machine learning software, they work by identifying and replicating patterns in data. But because these programs are used to generate code, text, music, and art, that data is itself created by humans, scraped from the web and copyright protected in one way or another.

For AI researchers in the far-flung misty past (aka the 2010s), this wasn’t much of an issue. At the time, state-of-the-art models were only capable of generating blurry, fingernail-sized black-and-white images of faces. This wasn’t an obvious threat to humans. But in the year 2022, when a lone amateur can use software like Stable Diffusion to copy an artist’s style in a matter of hours or when companies are selling AI-generated prints and social media filters that are explicit knock-offs of living designers, questions of legality and ethics have become much more pressing."

‘Wild West’ of Generative AI Poses Novel Copyright Questions; Bloomberg Law, November 18, 2022

Riddhi Setty and Isaiah Poritz , Bloomberg Law; ‘Wild West’ of Generative AI Poses Novel Copyright Questions 

"Artist Kris Kashtanova became the first person to register a copyright for an artificial intelligence-assisted work in September, for an 18-page comic book called “Zarya of the Dawn” that was created with the AI art program Midjourney.

In recent weeks, however, Kashtanova said the Copyright Office wants to revoke the registration because it had overlooked the use of AI in the creation of the comic.

The rapid rise of artificial intelligence applications has left the burgeoning industry reckoning with how the powerful new technology interacts with copyright laws that govern everything from source code to art prints. The legal landscape is far from clear, with both the creators of AI tools and the artists who use them confronting copyright questions that haven’t yet been answered.

“It’s like the wild west right now,” said Ryan Abbott, an attorney at Brown Neri Smith & Khan LLP.

In what appears to be the first copyright infringement suit against the creator of an AI program, research company OpenAI Inc.—which has created a number of AI programs including generative art program DALL-E—was hit with a class action earlier this month by two software developers who said another OpenAI program called Copilot unlawfully duplicates their code without the proper license or attribution."

A.I.-Generated Art Is Already Transforming Creative Work; The New York Times, October 21, 2022

Kevin Roose, The New York Times ; A.I.-Generated Art Is Already Transforming Creative Work

"These programs use what’s known as “generative A.I.,” a type of A.I. that was popularized several years ago with the release of text-generating tools like GPT-3 but has since expanded into images, audio and video.

It’s still too early to tell whether this new wave of apps will end up costing artists and illustrators their jobs. What seems clear, though, is that these tools are already being put to use in creative industries."