Comment by a_wild_dandan
2 years ago
Why would we do this? And how would this conceivably even be enforced? I can't see this being useful or even well-defined past cartoonishly simple special cases of generation like "artist signatures for modalities where pixels are created."
Requiring attribution categorically across the vast domain of generative AI...can you please elaborate?
> Why would we do this?
i think it's a reasonable ask to enforce attribution of AI generated content. We enforce food labels, why not content?
I would go further and argue that AI generated content do not get granted the same copyright as human generated content, but with that, AI generated content using existing copyrighted training data does not violate copyright.
> We enforce food labels, why not content?
Regulation isn't always, but often is a drag on productivity. Food labels make total sense because the negative consequences of not doing it outweight the drag of doing it.
I'm not at all convinced that enforcing AI labeling and the resulting impossible task of policing and enforcing this will outweigh any negatives of not doing it.
I'm thinking about the cookie policy in Europe. I hate it and almost always just click through because so many websites work around it by making it a real pain to "reject cookies".
If you use an AI spell checker then will your resulting text all be without copyright?
If you use an AI coding assistant then will the written code be without copyright? Or will the code require a disclaimer that says some parts of it are AI generated?
You're also going to have to be very precise on defining what AI means. For most people a compiler is as magical as AI. They might even consider it AI, especially if it does some kind of automatic performance optimizations - after all, that's not the behavior the user wrote.