SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Australian Government wants AI to pay for copyright fees in move that may be more about getting a piece of the billions invested in AI. ARIA chief executive Annabelle Herd of the Copyright and AI Reference Group (CAIRG) has called the recommendation for a text and data mining exception "a radical change" that has been "put forward with very little evidence".
"Artificial Intelligence presents significant opportunities for Australia and our economy, however it's important that Australian creatives benefit from these opportunities too," Attorney-General Michelle Rowland said.
"Australian creatives are not only world class, but they are also the lifeblood of Australian culture, and we must ensure the right legal protections are in place."
[...] It is a difficult space for governments to regulate as they balance embracing the promised economic boons of AI without cumbersome red tape while also pitching guardrails.
In the lead-up to Labor's economic reform roundtable in August, the Productivity Commission urged against heavy-handed regulation of AI, warning it could smother opportunities.
Among its recommendations was a text and data mining exception – a call that sparked furore.
But Ms Rowland vowed the government would not "weaken copyright protections when it comes to AI".
"The tech industry and the creative sector must now come together and find sensible and workable solutions to support innovation while ensuring creators are compensated," she said.
"The government will support these next steps through the renewed focus tasked to the Copyright and AI reference group."
(Score: 5, Insightful) by jb on Wednesday October 29, @07:30AM (2 children)
That's quite possibly the first sensible thing our Attorney-General has ever said.
It's true that our copyright regime is too restrictive, but if and when those restrictions are relaxed, they must be relaxed for all Australians, not just for some tech toy fad like LLMs (and certainly not one that's controlled entirely by companies from outside of Australia!).
That bit is much more worrying. The chatter I've heard is that that will mean establishing a new copyright clearinghouse just for LLMs. Sure, such an approach will no doubt be welcomed by those authors who only want money in exchange for the use of their works.
But there's nothing in it for those of us who just want fair attribution for the use of our works. That includes any Australian who publishes software under permissive FOSS licences (and I imagine those who publish under copyleft licences must be even more upset!), those who publish textual works under CC licences, etc. etc.
(Score: 3, Touché) by shrewdsheep on Wednesday October 29, @09:59AM
Seems to be a lot of weasel-wording.
I would read that as: we just follow the rules. It is up to the AI industry to prove they are compliant.
These reads: we will change the rules. In a very positive interpretation it could read as: the discussion has to be about how to implement the proof of being compliant efficiently. In practice it means: which new rules can we agree on, so there is no/little cost in having AI companies being able to scrape stuff. Probably solutions have to be constructed this way, still opt-outs for individuals should be allowed for, which is unexpected.
In the end Attorney-Generals are political figures, not much sensible stuff is expected to leave their mouths.
(Score: 2) by driverless on Thursday October 30, @05:49AM
Well I think it's reprehensible to see a government that doesn't simply take a donation from a special-interest group and give it what it wants. That's socialism! Look at how proper governments do it, you hand their leader some shiny baubles and he gives you what you want [nytimes.com], that's how things should work.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 29, @12:37PM
Why should this specific group get a pass? No one else does, except perhaps the copyright police themselves when they feel like it.
This horse has already bolted. Whinging about locking the barn door is pointless. They have copied everything under the sun and now just want a free range to use it for profit.
Oh no! People have noticed! We did something bad! Boo hoo! What about our investment? Our investors? We are Too Big To Fail. Humanity depends on us. Workers will not be able to do their jobs without ChatGPT, Copilot, GrokAI, BingleBongleBooAIOfficeHandyHelper5000.1
I am crying tears of pain for them. Really. I am. Not tears of joy. Never.
:-: alas I am out of popcorn. brb. keep rolling. >>>
(Score: 2) by DadaDoofy on Wednesday October 29, @02:54PM (8 children)
Funny, even the socialists in Australia understand the vital importance of property rights and the rule of law. Take those away, and you remove any incentive to produce the works being stolen in the first place. It never ends well.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by jelizondo on Wednesday October 29, @03:53PM (6 children)
For over 25 years now, I have dedicated part of time to publish my own writings or help other publish theirs. For example, translations of articles by Joel Spolsky [joelonsoftware.com], subtitling TED talks or currently editing for Soylentnews.
All that time could have been dedicated to making money, but not all of us are motivated by greed. Motivation for producing works does not necessarily has to do with money.
(Score: 2) by DadaDoofy on Wednesday October 29, @06:31PM (5 children)
If people were sufficiently motivated to produce things out of "goodness" or "kindness" or whatever other kind of altruistic reason you can conjure up, other than money, how come communism always fails? Every. Single. Time.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 29, @07:07PM (1 child)
One part is corruption. Some/most humans are never satisfied with having the same as everyone around them and want more.
Another part, is a centrally-planned economy. This is, more specifically, a large point of failure. Authoritarian states try to control every thing from one location (a large government). This includes planning what to grow and how much, what to manufacture and when, etc. Governments generate a lot of bureaucracy. This results in centrally-planned economies being too slow to adapt to changes, like a crop failure or mass migration causing issues with food distribution. Being too slow to adapt to change results in large surpluses of some things while having dire shortages of other things.
Ideally, an economy based on needs should be able to react quickly to changing requirements and demand without people attempting to make a profit on every step of the process. It would also result in no billionaires, so would be violently opposed by anyone with enough money to not care about common good.
(Score: 2) by DadaDoofy on Wednesday October 29, @08:42PM
I won't disagree with some of the things you say, but you seem to have completely missed the most significant cause of communism's failure. If people can get handed free food and shelter in exchange for doing absolutely nothing, most of them will lack any motivation to contribute anything in exchange. Why should they, if they get nothing extra for doing more than the next guy?
As it relates to the production of food, this dynamic leads to food shortages and eventually mass starvation for all but the party leadership. Lots of money or no money, when you are starving, the absolute last thing of concern to you is "the common good".
(Score: 3, Touché) by jelizondo on Wednesday October 29, @08:16PM (2 children)
So now I'm a communist? Wow!
I was expecting a big thank you for helping keep Soyletnews running, not an insult.
(Score: 2) by DadaDoofy on Wednesday October 29, @09:00PM (1 child)
"So now I'm a communist? Wow!"
If you say so. I didn't, but you are certainly free interpret my remarks as you choose.
"I was expecting a big thank you for helping keep Soyletnews running, not an insult."
You know, I hadn't thought of it, but I also help also keep SoylentNews running with all the free content I've provided over the years. I'm rewarded with a regular stream of insults, and have never once expected a thank you. LOL
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 30, @12:28AM
Thank you, numnuts.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by mcgrew on Wednesday October 29, @04:43PM
Funny, even the socialists in Australia understand the vital importance of property rights
I don't know about Australia, but here in the US copyrighted "property" (isn't it "intellectual chattel"? Property is land) belongs to "We, the People" and its creator has a limited time monopoly on it ("limited" being defined by congress and the Supremes as "a lifetime plus a century"). AFAIC, they can train their AI with my books and articles ninety five years after I'm dead, or when they pay me for it (despite the fact that humans can read it for free).
And socialism does NOT negate property rights, you have been suckered by the Heritage Society to believe that socialism is communism, you gullible fool. It isn't. Socialism can't exist without democracy and property rights, communism cannot exist with them. The five happiest nations in the world are socialist, look it up.
Your health care system is socialist. Ours here in the US is capitalist. I'll trade you any day! Ours is both far more expensive and far less effective. Can you go bankrupt from getting sick or injured in Australia? You can here!
When masked police can stop you on the street and demand that you prove citizenship, your nation is a POLICE STATE
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Wednesday October 29, @04:50PM (5 children)
The TV news this morning said it's "national cat day" but judging from S/N it's World AI day. The first thing I did when logging on was to post a journal about chatgpt and copilot that had both pissed me off by being worthless.
Apparently, AI can only be useful to the rich and famous, it only has excuses for the rest of us. Like with music, I'm pretty sure the only Australians who will be collecting the royalties are those who are rich and famous.
When masked police can stop you on the street and demand that you prove citizenship, your nation is a POLICE STATE
(Score: 2) by DadaDoofy on Wednesday October 29, @06:48PM (4 children)
"We have a president who posted a fake video of himself shitting on America"
No. We have a president who posted a fake video of himself shitting on the enemies of America. There, FTFY.
(Score: 2, Touché) by mcgrew on Wednesday October 29, @07:33PM (2 children)
The enemies of America? So you're a MAGAT (Make America Grate Again Trumpie)? You are saying that SEVEN MILLION AMERICAN CITIZENS are America's enemies?
What the FUCK is wrong with you???
Let me tell you about me and your "patriotic" hero. He dodged the draft and said I was a sucker for volunteering to defend my country. I didn't have to, my draft number was 365, I'd have gone last. But I volunteered.
Are you a veteran? No? Then shut the fuck up about "Enemies of America" protesting our un-American president's un-American bullshit. Apparently you don't believe in the Constitutional rule of law he calls the "deep state" and call ME who defended OUR CONSTITUTION an enemy of America?
Fuck you and the sick elephant you rode in on, buddy. Move to Russia and take your un-American hero with you.
I miss the REAL Republican party! It died in 2020. Maybe earlier.
When masked police can stop you on the street and demand that you prove citizenship, your nation is a POLICE STATE
(Score: 1, Troll) by RedGreen on Thursday October 30, @01:46PM (1 child)
"I miss the REAL Republican party! It died in 2020. Maybe earlier."
You are only off by half a century or so, that is at least how long the Repugnant Party has been using the system to try to subvert democracy and turn your country into a one party fascist state. They have been playing the long game that too many in your country are more than happy to support. The ones that do not are mostly spineless morons who do absolutely nothing to fight back and defend your countries supposed principles.
"I modded down, down, down, and the flames went higher." -- Sven Olsen
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Friday October 31, @08:47PM
Yes, it started under Reagan but only now has their party become full-on un-apologetically fascist while pretending it is normal and that normal is "crazy far left Marxist."
Not only would Lincoln not recognize his party, neither would Eisenhower, who fought men like Trump and his fascist MAGAT party only a few years before being elected president. The Republican party is dead.
When masked police can stop you on the street and demand that you prove citizenship, your nation is a POLICE STATE
(Score: 3, Touché) by weirsbaski on Thursday October 30, @08:12AM
No. We have a president who posted a fake video of himself shitting on people who don't like him. That group and "enemies of America" are NOT the same.