One after another, countries across the world put off the table the introduction of copyright exceptions for the AI era. Instead, they are exploring fair and sustainable licensing models for the use of copyrighted works in AI development, with respect to rightsholders’ rights.
Yesterday, the UK government published its over 100-page report (https://lnkd.in/epygjMam) on copyright and AI, confirming that a copyright-data mining exception with an opt-out for AI development is now off the table. Instead, it views licensing as the way forward for AI to evolve while ensuring that rightsholders’ rights remain robust.
Australia reached a similar conclusion in October, when it announced (https://lnkd.in/dVjteeEk) that it would not introduce a TDM exception but would rather examine whether a new paid collective licensing framework under the copyright act should be established for AI, or a voluntary licensing framework should be maintained, showing its focus on licensing as the avenue for the development of ethical and trustworthy AI.
At EU level, there are still voices, though limited, trying to fit the entire AI training process under the Text and Data Mining (TDM) exception, as laid down in Article 4 of the Directive 2019/790/EU (Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive-CDSM). Yet, this exception was conceived long before Generative AI technologies and modern chatbots emerged. The fact that generative AI was not envisaged at the time this provision was drafted has been confirmed both by the European Parliament’s rapporteur for the CDSM Directive, MEP Axel Voss, and by the European Commission.
The Like Company vs Google case (https://lnkd.in/e_PCfpFN), which is expected to shed light on whether TDM exception covers the AI training process, is still pending before the CJEU with the opinion of the AG Maciej Szpunar anticipated for 3 September. The fundamental question remains intact though: how can the reproduction of original works for the training of AI models, leading to the production of outputs, often incorporating the original work per se, without authorisation or remuneration, and which may compete with the original works in the market, can fit under the TDM exception designed solely to allow the analysis of text and data in in order to generate information?
Boosting EU’s competitiveness is one of the EU’s priorities for the 2024-2029 mandate and rightly so. But competitiveness depends on high-quality inputs. High-quality creative works used as input, in turn, require investment and respect for those who create them.
Original piece posted by IFRRO on LinkedIn.