Sometimes it feels like tech is eating itself, and this week’s AI news, including a new blockchain initiative, is no exception. The AI news this week comprises several eyebrow-raising stories (when doesn’t it?). Recently, I have been talking about a maturing landscape. You could be forgiven, this week, for thinking that maturity has already developed exponentially to the point where several sharks have already been jumped.
ALLi News Editor, Dan Holloway
Remember the distant mythological past when blockchain was the ubiquitous shiny new thing? Well, it’s still there, sheepishly but clearly disambiguated these days from any associations with crypto exchanges, of course. And the latest use it is being put to, by a company called Story, is protecting the intellectual property of creators from AI. While the $2.25bn valuation of the company does feel ridiculous, the idea itself doesn’t. What blockchain’s real superskill is, of course, is keeping track of everything that happens to a file from the moment it comes into being to, well, as long as it exists. So if you want to track who is scraping your content and what they are doing with it, there is some merit to imagining blockchain technology might help.
But the real thing that made me sit up and take note of the, er, story about Story is that its founder is S.Y. Lee, who founded Raddish in 2014. This is, as many of you will recall, one of the most popular crowd-based self-publishing platforms. True to its origins, Story has already attracted the use of self-publishing platforms in the comics space, meaning authors who use them can track the use of their IP and monetize it should it be sought for AI training.
Regulating AI
Still on the subject of AI, you will recall from multiple reports in this column that the European Union has taken the lead in regulating AI. The AI Act was hailed by publishers as firmly taking the side of creators over technology. This week, tech has hit back with high-profile CEOs criticizing the EU’s approach.
We would expect no less of Mark Zuckerberg, but the criticism comes in a joint statement between him and Spotify’s Daniel Ek. Ek has, of course, as Spotify seeks to dominate the audiobook space, positioned himself as the champion of creators and discoverability for smaller artists. This latest move might lead some to question that commitment.
Their argument is that if the EU singles itself out with harsh regulation, it will lose the benefits for EU customers of the resulting AI, which customers elsewhere will continue to enjoy. Having avidly observed EU institutions and legislators for many decades, I have to say that expecting them to change because you suggest they are taking a unique approach that heavily benefits artisan creators over large institutions might not be the finest strategy. Just look at the fierce protection of regional comestible producers.
Meanwhile in the UK, the Society of Authors has written a letter to tech companies asserting the rights of authors in relation to AI. Specifically, they assert that their members do not consent to the use, including past use, of their work to train AI. And they have given tech companies a tight deadline to acknowledge this letter (seven days) and respond (twenty-one days). That response should contain details of which books have been used and how. What will happen if tech companies fail to respond is not clear, but it is I am sure something we may shortly find out.
