Daniel Onren Latorre’s Post

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!

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

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.

The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, a nonprofit tech-sector think tank, unleashes a barrage of criticism at the Federal Trade Commission for its comments in a U.S. Copyright Office inquiry on artificial intelligence, saying the FTC is taking positions outside its jurisdiction that threaten the competitive development of AI technology. “Not only is the FTC overreaching into areas beyond its regulatory purview -- it has no jurisdiction over copyright issues -- but imposing additional restrictions on the use of creative works in AI beyond existing copyright law will undercut competition. Congress should remind the FTC that questions about the copyright implications of emerging technologies, including AI, should be left to the Copyright Office,” ITIF says in a Jan. 22 blog post. READ MORE: #artificialintelligence

Exciting to glean invaluable insights from these experts, particularly in navigating through issues fraught with such profound uncertainty!

2024 will certainly be another interesting year for copyright lawyers as AI cases mount and progress, legislation is proposed and implemented, and further deals are done between developers and creators. Always an open question is whether the market, courts and legislators can move quickly - and cautiously - enough to provide legal and business clarity that will deliver on the promise of innovation and security for the next generation of creators. Beyond 2024, a looming challenge is how to create a consistent global framework that will ensure the winners and losers in this evolution of technology are not divided along geographic lines. https://lnkd.in/eG4Vdq5G

AI tools can seem glamorous, but beyond the glitter, there’s a gritty side. Who owns the content? How do you avoid breaking the law? How do you protect copyright? How can you be respectful and ethical when it comes to using AI to generate, improve or alter content? Check out our latest blogpost so you can: - give credit where due - respect privacy rights - use the right kind of content with AI - stay up to date with changing rules, regulations and laws, worldwide Find out more: https://lnkd.in/eHFy7_Fy

I am pleased to share our comment we recently submitted to the U.S. Copyright Office (USCO). In early 2023, the USCO launched an initiative to examine copyright law and policy issues raised by AI, including the scope of copyright in content generated using AI (https://copyright.gov/ai/). After a staff member saw my colleague Kathleen Grace speaking on a panel, we were encouraged to share our perspective. Our comment https://lnkd.in/dN4ApwmZ highlights Vermillio's fundamental values, technological capabilities, and belief in the power of #AuthenticatedAI. We are confident that Authenticated IP can enable a vibrant marketplace where creators, technologists, and consumers all benefit from generative AI, and where the scales of risk and reward are more balanced. Immense economic value will be created, all while protecting the artists, filmmakers, writers and creatives who define our culture, and reflect what makes us human. Many of the largest tech platforms, including Meta, Google, OpenAI and Microsoft also submitted their points of view. Additionally, many of the companies that control the world’s most beloved IP, such as Sony, The Walt Disney Company, Warner Bros. Discovery, and WME | William Morris Endeavor, also shared comments. The USCO’s initiative will ultimately lead to critical policy developments in the burgeoning field of AI. We are proud to share our expertise and to contribute to their important work.

As we continuously seek out opportunities to demonstrate an authenticated approach to the use of generative AI, we recently submitted a comment to the U.S. Copyright Office (USCO) sharing our philosophy. You can read the entire comment via our CEO Dan Neely's post. #AuthenticatedAI

In 2021, while studying in the Media, Communication and Space Law program at the University of Luxembourg, I wrote a course paper on copyrighting dreams in IP law. As AI technology continues to rapidly develop, I'm reminded of the relevance of my essay in understanding copyright in AI. That's why I recently published the essay on my blog. Check it out here: https://lnkd.in/da-qrDxH