Controversial government proposals to amend copyright law to allow access by developers of artificial intelligence systems have been cautiously welcomed by the Law Society. However practical adoption of the government’s proposed 'opt-out' model for data-mining will require careful consideration and must be underpinned by greater openness from developers, Chancery Lane said.
The Society was responding to proposals set out by the Intellectual Property Office to clarify the law governing the ‘mining’ of data from publicly accessible websites in order to train AI systems. System developers argue that their models do not retain full texts, images or recordings but rather convert them into statistical representations from which an algorithm synthesises outputs. However bodies such as the Publishers Association and the BPI, which represents the music industry, say that such unlicensed usage breaches copyright law.
Under its ‘innovation friendly’ approach to AI regulation, the government says it favours creating a general ‘data mining exception’ while allowing rights-holders to opt out of such uses. In its response to the consultation, the Law Society agrees with the government 'that the lack of clarity about the current regime is holding back progress regarding AI development and economic growth'. It also agrees that the ‘opt-out’ exemption is the most suitable of three options presented - but that its details and practical adoption ‘need to be carefully considered’. It also agrees that AI developers should disclose the sources of their training material.
Society chief executive Ian Jeffery, a former practitioner in IP and technology law, said: 'There has to be a specific and controlled process for using publicly available data and other content by AI, making sure creators retain control of their intellectual property. Copyright rules should be able to protect and benefit creators and AI developers. For the sake of transparency, developers should be encouraged to disclose their training data sources. While large AI models should be regulated, similar standards should be made available for smaller innovators on a voluntary basis.'
The proposed UK government approach is in line with that adopted by the EU. By contrast Japan allows the widespread use of copyright material for AI training as does the US, under the 'fair use' doctrine.
'AI knows no borders, so we urge the UK government to collaborate with other countries as the new system should be able to work on an international scale,' Jeffery added.
No comments yet