Copyright and AI Policy Needs Precision, Not Panic
Last month, nearly 1,000 artists affixed their names to an ad that ran in the New York Times, arguing that generative A.I. is built on “theft — plain and simple.” The campaign—which the Times itself explicitly supports—argues that tech companies are using creators’ work “without authorization” and encourages companies to negotiate licensing deals with rightsholders instead. Artists, creators, and others concerned about creativity have legitimate concerns with AI technology and its potential to disrupt livelihoods. However, the campaign behind this ad is trying to win an urgent policy fight through sleight of hand and reductionist rhetoric.
The “Stealing Isn’t Innovation” ad was organized by the Human Artistry Campaign, a coalition that includes artist and creator groups, as well as copyright maximalists like the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and the Authors Guild. The history of these industry groups demonstrates that their primary goal is not “defending artists.”
Related Knowledge Center: Artificial intelligence
On top of a failing business model, newsrooms must navigate the powerful — and not fully reliable — new capabilities of artificial intelligence and the deployment of large language models.
State of the business model | Copyright and intellectual property
Related Knowledge Center: Copyright and intellectual property
With copyright questions already complicated by the emergence of the web in the 1990s, artificial intelligence raised the stakes to a new level.