And another note: the UK has decided NOT to give a blanket exemption to AI developers for copyright: "We recommend that the Government does not pursue plans for a broad text and data mining exemption to copyright. Instead, the Government should proactively support small AI developers in particular, who may find difficulties in acquiring licences, by reviewing how licensing schemes can be introduced for technical material and how mutually-beneficial arrangements can be struck with rights management organisations and creative industries trade bodies. The Government should support the continuance of a strong copyright regime in the UK and be clear that licences are required to use copyrighted content in AI. In line with our previous work, this Committee also believes that the Government should act to ensure that creators are well rewarded in the copyright regime. (Paragraph 31)" The full report is here. It is something! https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/42766/documents/212749/default/
To be fair, Toni appears to be hawking Froot Loops.
Also useful that bots are sensitive to things that might trigger your theoretical cornflake chompers.
Nicely done, Kathryn. Insofar as the work is Bing's, and it in fact infringes, then I suppose Bing is liable?
And another note: the UK has decided NOT to give a blanket exemption to AI developers for copyright: "We recommend that the Government does not pursue plans for a broad text and data mining exemption to copyright. Instead, the Government should proactively support small AI developers in particular, who may find difficulties in acquiring licences, by reviewing how licensing schemes can be introduced for technical material and how mutually-beneficial arrangements can be struck with rights management organisations and creative industries trade bodies. The Government should support the continuance of a strong copyright regime in the UK and be clear that licences are required to use copyrighted content in AI. In line with our previous work, this Committee also believes that the Government should act to ensure that creators are well rewarded in the copyright regime. (Paragraph 31)" The full report is here. It is something! https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/42766/documents/212749/default/
A few more references thanks to the ever-insightful Neil Turkewitz (that I'll just put here here, so as not to make the post even longer):
https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/03/opinions/new-york-times-openai-microsoft-lawsuit-oconnor/index.html
https://www.wired.com/story/chatgpt-generative-artificial-intelligence-regulation/
https://lpeproject.org/blog/seven-reactions-to-bidens-executive-order-on-artificial-intelligence/