Intellectual property rights

UN adopts China-led AI resolution

The UN General Assembly has adopted a resolution on AI capacity building, led by China. This non-binding resolution seeks to enhance developing countries’ AI capabilities through international cooperation and capacity-building initiatives. It also urges international organisations and financial institutions to support these efforts.

The resolution comes in the context of the ongoing technology rivalry between Beijing and Washington, as both nations strive to influence AI governance and portray each other as destabilising forces. Earlier this year, the US promoted a UN resolution advocating for ‘safe, secure, and trustworthy’ AI systems, gaining the support of over 110 countries, including China.

China’s resolution acknowledges the UN’s role in AI capacity-building and calls on Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to report on the unique challenges developing countries face and provide recommendations to address them.

CIR sues OpenAI and Microsoft

The Center for Investigative Reporting (CIR), known for producing Mother Jones and Reveal, has sued OpenAI and Microsoft, accusing them of using its content without permission and compensation. The lawsuit, filed in New York federal court, claims that OpenAI’s business model is based on exploiting copyrighted works and argues that AI-generated summaries threaten the financial stability of news organisations by reducing direct engagement with their content.

CIR’s CEO, Monika Bauerlein, emphasised the danger of AI tools replacing direct relationships between readers and news organisations, potentially undermining the foundations of independent journalism. The lawsuit is part of a broader legal challenge faced by OpenAI and Microsoft, with similar suits filed by other media outlets and authors.

Why does it matter?

Some news organisations have opted to collaborate with OpenAI, signing deals to allow the use of their content for AI training in exchange for compensation. Despite OpenAI’s argument that its use of publicly accessible content falls under ‘fair use,’ CIR’s lawsuit highlights the financial and ethical implications of using copyrighted material without proper attribution or payment, warning of significant impacts on investigative journalism and democracy.

Time magazine partners with OpenAI for content access

Time magazine has entered a multi-year agreement with OpenAI, granting the AI firm access to its news archives. The deal allows OpenAI’s ChatGPT to cite and link back to Time.com in user queries, although financial details were not disclosed. OpenAI, led by Sam Altman, has forged similar partnerships with prominent media outlets such as the Financial Times, Axel Springer, Le Monde, and Prisa Media.

These collaborations help train and enhance OpenAI’s products while providing media companies access to AI technology for developing new products. Despite some media companies suing OpenAI over content usage, such partnerships are crucial for training AI models and offer a potential revenue stream for news publishers. Such a trend comes amid broader industry tensions, highlighted by Meta’s decision to block news sharing in Canada following new legislation requiring payment for news content.

Why does it matter?

The OpenAI-Time deal is part of a larger movement where publishers seek fair compensation for their content amid the rise of generative AI, which has prompted discussions on ethical content usage and compliance with web standards.

AI-generated Elon Musk hijacks Channel Seven’s YouTube

Channel Seven is currently investigating a significant breach on its YouTube channel, where unauthorised content featuring an AI-generated deepfake version of Elon Musk was streamed repeatedly. The incident on Thursday involved the channel being altered to mimic Tesla’s official presence. Viewers were exposed to a fabricated live stream where the AI-generated Musk promoted cryptocurrency investments via a QR code, claiming a potential doubling of assets.

During the stream, the fake Musk engaged with an audience, urging them to take advantage of the purported investment opportunity. The footage also featured a chat box from the fake Tesla page, displaying comments and links that further promoted the fraudulent scheme. The incident affected several other channels under Channel Seven’s umbrella, including 7 News and Spotlight, with all content subsequently deleted from these platforms.

A spokesperson from Channel Seven acknowledged the issue, confirming they are investigating alongside YouTube to resolve the situation swiftly. The network’s main YouTube page appeared inaccessible following the breach, prompting the investigation into how the security lapse occurred. The incident comes amidst broader challenges for Seven West Media, which recently announced significant job cuts as part of a cost-saving initiative led by its new CEO.

Why does it matter?

The breach underscores growing concerns over cybersecurity on social media platforms, particularly as unauthorised access to high-profile channels can disseminate misleading or harmful information. Channel Seven’s efforts to address the issue highlight the importance of robust digital security measures in safeguarding against such incidents in the future.

YouTube seeks music licensing deals for AI generation tools

YouTube is negotiating with major record labels to license their songs for AI tools that clone popular artists’ music. The negotiations aim to secure the content needed to legally train AI song generators and launch new tools this year. Google-owned YouTube has offered upfront payments to major labels like Sony, Warner, and Universal to encourage artists to participate, but many remain opposed, fearing it could devalue their work.

Previously, YouTube tested an AI tool called ‘Dream Track,’ which allowed users to create music clips mimicking well-known artists. However, only a few artists participated, including Charli XCX and John Legend. YouTube now hopes to sign up dozens more artists to expand its AI song generator tool, though it won’t carry the Dream Track brand.

Why does it matter?

These negotiations come as AI companies like OpenAI are making licensing agreements with media groups. The proposed music deals would involve one-off payments to labels rather than royalty-based arrangements. YouTube’s AI tools could become part of its Shorts platform, competing with TikTok and other similar platforms. As these discussions continue, major labels are also suing AI startups for allegedly using copyrighted recordings without permission, seeking significant damages.

Reddit’s new rules for AI and content use

Reddit has announced updates to its Robots Exclusion Protocol (robots.txt file), which regulates automated web bot access to websites. Traditionally used to allow search engines to index site content, the protocol now faces challenges with AI-driven scraping for model training, often without proper attribution.

In addition to the revised robots.txt file, Reddit will enforce rate limits and blocks on unidentified bots and crawlers. According to multiple sources, these measures apply to entities not complying with Reddit’s Public Content Policy or lacking formal agreements with the platform. The changes are aimed at deterring AI companies from using Reddit content to train large language models without permission. Despite these updates, AI crawlers could potentially disregard Reddit’s directives, as highlighted by recent incidents.

Recently, Wired uncovered that AI-powered startup Perplexity continued scraping Reddit content despite being blocked in the robots.txt file. Perplexity’s CEO argued that robots.txt isn’t legally binding, raising questions about the effectiveness of such protocols in regulating AI scraping practices.

Reddit’s updates will exempt authorised partners like Google, with whom Reddit has a substantial agreement allowing AI model training on its data. This move signals Reddit’s stance on controlling access to its content for AI training purposes, emphasising compliance with its policies to safeguard user interests.

These developments align with Reddit’s recent policy updates, underscoring its efforts to manage and regulate data access and use by commercial entities and partners.

Industry leaders unite for ethical AI data practices

Several companies that license music, images, videos, and other datasets for training AI systems have formed the first trade group in the sector, the Dataset Providers Alliance (DPA). The founding members of the DPA include Rightsify, vAIsual, Pixta, and Datarade. The group aims to advocate for ethical data sourcing, including protecting intellectual property rights and ensuring rights for individuals depicted in datasets.

The rise of generative AI technologies has led to backlash from content creators and numerous copyright lawsuits against major tech companies like Google, Meta, and OpenAI. Developers often train AI models using vast amounts of content, much of which is scraped from the internet without permission. To address these issues, the DPA will establish ethical standards for data transactions, ensuring that members do not sell data obtained without explicit consent. The alliance will also push for legislative measures in the NO FAKES Act, penalising unauthorised digital replicas of voices or likenesses and supporting transparency requirements in AI training data.

The DPA plans to release a white paper in July outlining its positions and advocating for these standards and legislative changes to ensure ethical practices in AI data sourcing and usage.

London cinema cancels AI-written film premiere after public backlash

A central London cinema has cancelled the premiere of a film written entirely by AI following a public backlash. The Prince Charles Cinema in Soho was set to host the world debut of ‘The Last Screenwriter,’ created by ChatGPT, but concerns about ‘the use of AI in place of a writer’ led to the screening being axed.

In a statement, the cinema explained that customer feedback highlighted significant concerns regarding AI’s role in the arts. The film, directed by Peter Luisi, was marketed as the first feature film written entirely by AI, and its plot centres on a screenwriter who grapples with an AI scriptwriting system that surpasses his abilities.

The cinema stated that the film was intended as an experiment to spark discussion about AI’s impact on the arts. However, the strong negative response from their audience prompted them to cancel the screening, emphasising their commitment to their patrons and the movie industry.

The controversy over AI’s role in the arts reflects broader industry concerns, as seen in last year’s Sag-Aftra strike in Hollywood. The debate continues, with UK MPs now calling for measures to ensure fair compensation for artists whose work is used by AI developers.

AI award-winning headless flamingo photo found to be real

A controversial AI-generated photo of a headless flamingo has ignited a heated debate over the ethical implications of AI in art and technology. The image, which was honored in the AI category of the 1839 Awards’ Color Photography Contest, has drawn criticism and concern from various sectors, including artists, technologists, and ethicists. 

The photo, titled ‘F L A M I N G O N E,’ depicts a flamingo without its head. It was created by photographer Miles Astray using a sophisticated AI model designed to generate lifelike images. Contrary to initial impressions, the photo wasn’t generated from a text prompt but was instead based on a real — and not at all beheaded — flamingo that Astray captured on the beaches of Aruba two years ago. After the photo won both third place in the category and the People’s Vote award, Astray revealed the truth, leading to his disqualification.

Proponents of AI-generated art assert that such creations push the boundaries of artistic expression, offering new and innovative ways to explore and challenge traditional concepts of art. They argue that the AI’s ability to produce unconventional and provocative images can be seen as a form of artistic evolution, allowing for greater diversity and creativity in the art world. However, detractors highlight the potential risks and ethical dilemmas posed by such technology. The headless flamingo photo, in particular, has been described as unsettling and inappropriate, sparking a broader conversation about the limits of AI-generated content. Concerns have been raised about the potential for AI to produce harmful or distressing images, and the need for guidelines and oversight to ensure responsible use.

The release of the headless flamingo photo has prompted a range of responses from the art and tech communities. Some artists view the image as a provocative statement on the nature of AI and its role in society, while others see it as a troubling example of the technology’s potential to create disturbing content. Tech experts emphasise the importance of developing ethical frameworks and guidelines for AI-generated art. They argue that while AI has the potential to revolutionize creative fields, it is crucial to establish clear boundaries and standards to prevent misuse and ensure that the technology is used responsibly.

‘‘F L A M I N G O N E’ accomplished its mission by sending a poignant message to a world grappling with ever-advancing, powerful technology and the profusion of fake images it brings. My goal was to show that nature is just so fantastic and creative, and I don’t think any machine can beat that. But, on the other hand, AI imagery has advanced to a point where it’s indistinguishable from real photography. So where does that leave us? What are the implications and the pitfalls of that? I think that is a very important conversation that we need to be having right now.”, Miles Astray told The Washington Post.

Why does it matter?

The controversy surrounding the AI-generated headless flamingo photo highlights the broader ethical challenges posed by artificial intelligence in creative fields. As AI technology continues to advance, it is increasingly capable of producing highly realistic and complex images. That raises important questions about the role of AI in art, the responsibilities of creators and developers, and the need for ethical guidelines to navigate these new frontiers.

Adobe removes AI imitations after Ansel Adams estate complaint

Adobe faced backlash this weekend after the Ansel Adams estate criticised the company for selling AI-generated imitations of the famous photographer’s work. The estate posted a screenshot on Threads showing ‘Ansel Adams-style’ images on Adobe Stock, stating that Adobe’s actions had pushed them to their limit. Adobe allows AI-generated images on its platform but requires users to have appropriate rights and prohibits content created using prompts with other artists’ names.

In response, Adobe removed the offending content and reached out to the Adams estate, which claimed it had been contacting Adobe since August 2023 without resolution. The estate urged Adobe to respect intellectual property and support the creative community proactively. Adobe Stock’s Vice President, Matthew Smith, noted that moderators review all submissions, and the company can block users who violate rules.

Adobe’s Director of Communications, Bassil Elkadi, confirmed they are in touch with the Adams estate and have taken appropriate steps to address the issue. The Adams estate has thanked Adobe for the removal and expressed hope that the issue is resolved permanently.