The Guardian (USA)

UK ministers urged to protect creatives whose work is used by AI firms

- Dan Milmo Global technology editor

Ministers must defend content creators whose work is being taken without permission by tech companies to build artificial intelligen­ce products such as chatbots that generate “vast financial rewards”, a House of Lords committee has said.

The legal framework in the UK is failing to enforce the basic principles of copyright amid a rise in AI developmen­t, said the Lords’ communicat­ions and digital committee.

“Some tech firms are using copyrighte­d material without permission, reaping vast financial rewards,” said the committee.

Copyright has become a key battlegrou­nd in the developmen­t of generative AI – the term for technology that generates text, image and audio from a human-typed command.

Content creators and owners argue that their material is being used illegally to train large language models (LLMs), the technology behind chatbots, which need to be fed a huge amount of data in order to reliably predict the next word in a sequence of words.

A report on LLMs and generative AI, published on Friday, said the principles of copyright were clear: to reward creators for their efforts; prevent use of their work without permission; and to encourage innovation.

Urging the government to take action on flouting of copyright, the committee said: “The current legal framework is failing to ensure these outcomes occur and the government has a duty to act. It cannot sit on its hands for the next decade and hope the courts will provide an answer.”

The committee recommende­d the government decides whether copyright law provides enough protection to copyright holders. If it believes there are legal uncertaint­ies around the issue, peers said, it should set out options for updating legislatio­n.

Lady Stowell, the committee’s Conservati­ve chair, said: “The government needs to be clear whether copyright law provides sufficient protection­s to rights holders because of the introducti­on of LLMs. If the government is clear that the legislativ­e framework is not adequate then it should update that legislativ­e framework.”

The government’s intellectu­al property office is drawing up a code of practice on copyright and AI. Under the 1988 Copyright Act an exemption is made for text and data mining if it is research for “a non-commercial purpose”. In 2022 the government indicated that it would widen that exemption to any use but has now rowed back on that.

Stowell added that the UK, with its wealth of private and government­owned data, could offer licensed datasets to AI firms hoping to build models on a secure legal basis. “If we can create new licensed datasets, there is a market we ought to be able to take advantage of,” she said.

OpenAI, the US-based developer of the groundbrea­king ChatGPT chatbot, is being sued in the US by the New York Times and a number of authors for alleged copyright infringeme­nt. One group of writers, which includes the bestsellin­g John Grisham, has accused OpenAI of “systematic theft on a mass scale”.

OpenAI said in its submission to the committee that it would be impossible to create tools like ChatGPT without access to copyrighte­d material. Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta, the image generator company Stability AI and Microsoft, an investor in OpenAI, also told the committee that limiting access to data could result in substandar­d or biased models.

In the US, OpenAI’s defence relies on the concept of “fair use”, which allows use of content in certain circumstan­ces without seeking the owner’s permission. In the UK there are also copyright exemptions under “fair dealing”, which relates to areas such as research, private study and news reporting.

Elsewhere in the report, the committee warns the government of a protracted period of “technologi­cal turbulence” owing to AI and urges ministers to act against market power being concentrat­ed in the hands of a small number of companies.

Stowell said: “There has to be open competitio­n. The market has to remain open. It’s dangerous if we have a situation where it is under the control of a small number of large firms.”

A government spokespers­on said: “The IPO [intellectu­al property office] has engaged with stakeholde­rs as part of a working group with the aim of agreeing a voluntary code on AI and copyright. We will update on that work soon and continue to work closely with stakeholde­rs to ensure the AI and creative industries continue to thrive together.”

 ?? Photograph: Jonathan Raa/ NurPhoto/Rex/Shuttersto­ck ?? Creators say their material is being used to train language models, earning AI firms vast sums of money.
Photograph: Jonathan Raa/ NurPhoto/Rex/Shuttersto­ck Creators say their material is being used to train language models, earning AI firms vast sums of money.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States