91Ƶ

Skip to content

Creators urge Ottawa to force disclosure of 91Ƶblack box91Ƶ AI system training

Group says AI is profiting off their copyrighted work, wants government to take a stand
web1_20240513150536-7afe972a16a619e706d9a057230e977889cedcca926382c68fc3c6bd0bbc82bb
The Peace Tower on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on Monday, March 18, 2024. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean Kilpatrick

Canadian creators and publishers want the government to do something about the unauthorized and usually unreported use of their content to train generative artificial intelligence systems.

But AI companies maintain that using the material to train their systems doesn91Ƶt violate copyright, and say limiting its use would stymie the development of AI in Canada.

The two sides are making their cases in recently published submissions to a consultation on copyright and AI being undertaken by the federal government as it considers how Canada91Ƶs copyright laws should address the emergence of generative AI systems like OpenAI91Ƶs ChatGPT.

Generative AI can create text, images, videos and computer code based on a simple prompt, but to do that, the systems must first study vast amounts of existing content.

In its submission to the government, Access Copyright argued most and potentially all large language models 91Ƶare currently profiting from unauthorized use and reproduction of copyright protected works.91Ƶ

It91Ƶs taking place in a 91Ƶblack box,91Ƶ according to Access Copyright, which represents writers, visual artists and publishers.

91ƵRightsholders know it is happening, but due to the information asymmetry between themselves and AI platforms, they cannot determine who is conducting the activity, with whose works, and have no mechanism to stop it from happening.91Ƶ

Music Canada, which represents the country91Ƶs major record labels, said last year, a fake AI-generated song mimicking the voices of Drake and The Weeknd 91Ƶmade one thing abundantly clear: AI models and systems have already ingested massive amounts of proprietary datasets without authorization from the source of the data or rightsholders.91Ƶ

The Writers91Ƶ Guild of Canada asked the government to start with implementing basic disclosure and reporting obligations. It said developers have all the knowledge of the work that is being mined and how it91Ƶs being used, while creators have none of that information.

Some organizations have signed licensing deals with AI companies. But the Canadian Authors Association said rightsholders face 91Ƶimmense obstacles91Ƶ in licensing their content 91Ƶbecause they are being kept in the dark as to which of their works are being used91Ƶ by which companies.

It asked Canada to clarify that text and data mining are subject to copyright laws.

Numerous lawsuits are underway in the United States over the use of copyrighted materials by generative AI systems, including one launched this week by the world91Ƶs biggest record labels against two AI music generators.

The Canadian Media Producers Association said legal cases illustrate the problem posed by a lack of transparency, citing one case in which the AI company argued the rightsholder couldn91Ƶt proceed with the infringement allegation unless they could specify the exact work used for training.

91ƵRightsholders will also undoubtedly face similar evidentiary issues as many datasets used to train Generative AI systems are purportedly destroyed after the initial training is complete,91Ƶ it said.

The group said it91Ƶs an issue that 91Ƶdemands immediate attention91Ƶ and asked the government to implement transparency requirements.

But AI companies maintain the kind of transparency rightsholders are asking for isn91Ƶt realistic.

Microsoft told the government training large-scale AI systems involves 91Ƶvast volumes91Ƶ of data, and companies shouldn91Ƶt have to keep records of that or disclose the content that is used for training.

91ƵIt would not be feasible to record such information and any such requirement would inhibit AI development,91Ƶ it said.

The company argued it is not 91Ƶcopyright infringement to analyze works and learn concepts and facts.91Ƶ

Google said AI training is already exempted under existing copyright law, though the government should adopt an exemption to make that explicit.

Google said requiring permission to use content for training purposes would expose competitively sensitive information and 91Ƶwould effectively block the development and use of large language models and other types of cutting-edge AI.91Ƶ

It also said AI developers don91Ƶt have access to accurate information about copyright status.

91ƵIn fact, there is no such source of truth anywhere in the world. Thus, complying with disclosure rules may simply prove impossible from the start.91Ƶ

Canadian AI company Cohere said using content for training AI systems works similarly to how an individual reads books to become more informed.

The company said the process doesn91Ƶt violate copyright, and argued that needs to be clear in the law. Otherwise, 91ƵCanada91Ƶs ambitions to be the home of world-leading AI companies and ecosystems91Ƶ could be undermined.

The Council of Canadian Innovators, which represents the Canadian tech sector, said disclosure requirements would harm smaller companies as opposed to their Big Tech rivals. It warned this would 91Ƶseriously hamper the potential of Canadian companies to scale significantly.91Ƶ

READ ALSO:

Anja Karadeglija, The Canadian Press

Breaking News You Need To Know

Sign up for free account today and start receiving our exclusive newsletters.

Sign Up with google Sign Up with facebook

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google and apply.

Reset your password

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google and apply.

A link has been emailed to you - check your inbox.



Don't have an account? Click here to sign up




(or

91Ƶ

) document.head.appendChild(flippScript); window.flippxp = window.flippxp || {run: []}; window.flippxp.run.push(function() { window.flippxp.registerSlot("#flipp-ux-slot-ssdaw212", "Black Press Media Standard", 1281409, [312035]); }); }