Technology

Although no plans for comprehensive regulation have yet been announced, the UK government is developing a code of practice to govern the use of copyrighted works by AI companies. AI capabilities are developing at a rapid pace and this constantly shifting landscape risks making any code of conduct redundant unless it is underpinned by high-level principles that are clear and stable.

Source: Authors and artificial intelligence: what next?

Companies impacted by the AI Act are expected to challenge some of its provisions in the courts, which could further delay implementation across the continent. “There’s a lot for businesses to consider,” noted Ireland-based AI legal expert Barry Scannell in a post following Friday’s vote, noting that “enhanced transparency requirements” may challenge “the protection of intellectual property,” requiring “major strategic shifts” from firms using artificial intelligence systems.

Source: Europe’s New “Historic” AI Law Divides Tech Companies and Civil Rights Groups

The agreement was welcomed by music industry bodies GEMA, the Germany-based collecting society and performance rights organization, and IFPI, the global organization representing the recorded music industry. “The results we now have on the table are a step in the right direction but need to be sharpened further on a technical level,” GEMA said. “The outcome must be a clearly formulated transparency regime that obliges AI providers to submit detailed evidence on the contents they used to train their systems.”

Source: GEMA and IFPI ‘welcome the progress’ on EU’s landmark agreement on AI regulation

In new AI comments submitted to the Copyright Office, ASCAP doubled down on its support for direct licensing and likeness protections. “[A]rmchair speculations about the efficiency of licensing do not justify a rampant disregard for creators’ rights,” the PRO said. “As they have done countless times in the past, licensing models will adapt to the evolving technical environment to ensure that creators are compensated for the use of their intellectual property.”

Source: ASCAP Calls for AI Licensing, Likeness Protections in USCO Filing

In comments submitted to the U.S. Copyright Office this week, the Association of American Publishers slammed assertions by the tech industry that fair use permits AI developers to use copyrighted works to train their systems without permission or compensation. In the 15-page document, the AAP offered a blunt characterization of tech companies that, in their initial comments, asserted that “the rights of authors and publishers are an obstacle to innovation,” calling such claims “nonsense.”

Source: AAP Calls Big Tech’s AI Arguments ‘Nonsense’

For the entertainment industry, the most crucial aspect when it comes to AI is the requirement for transparency when using generative AI or copyright-protected work. Véronique Desbrosses, GESAC’s managing director, indeed called for a “a robust implementation” of “transparency requirements and respect for EU copyright rules applicable to all models.”

Source: European Union Reaches Provisional Deal on AI Act, Setting Transparency and Enforcement Guidelines

Last week, after months of hardball negotiations, Google and the Canadian government agreed on a deal that would require the company to pay Canadian news outlets about $73.5 million a year. Canadians are no longer facing the threat that Google would remove all news content from its search results. The settlement is far less than Canada wanted — it had sought $126 million — and a small fraction of the estimated $550 million that news publishers deserve from Google

Source: Opinion | News Publishers Are Fighting Big Tech Over Peanuts. They Could Be Owed Billions.