Copyright The Times
The government is conducting a consultation about the use of copyrighted work — so-called “scraping” — in the development of artificial intelligence systems. This is a complex issue in which a desire to foster the benign use of AI must be balanced against the right of those who work in the creative sector not to have their personal intellectual property used without permission or payment. Global tech wants to harness the work of talented people for free. Those people, understandably, are resisting. The government says it seeks to be an honest broker between competing interests.
The body organising the consultation is the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, headed by Liz Kendall. She recently appointed Kirsty Innes as a special adviser. Seven months ago, in a post on X since deleted, Innes said AI firms “in practice will never legally have to” compensate content creators for what, under existing UK copyright laws, amounts to theft.
Compensation is precisely the issue about which the government claims to be consulting. Yet the mind of a senior adviser to the relevant minister is already made up, in favour of caving in to the bullying demands of Big Tech.
The hope was that Ms Kendall would not share the craven attitude of Peter Kyle, her predecessor, towards the AI behemoths. Her appointment of Kirsty Innes, sadly, does not bode well for the negotiation of a fair solution to a serious injustice.
The importance of the creative sector to the British economy, and to British soft power around the world, is well known. About 2.5 million jobs depend on vibrant creative industries. The government, as countless artists have eloquently argued, ought to be straining every sinew to protect, encourage and reward those industries. Instead, its approach is scandalously defeatist.
No comments:
Post a Comment