Try the political quiz
@ISIDEWITHQuestionsTechnologicalArtificial IntelligenceGenerative AIData PrivacyIntellectual propertyCopyright Law•••Started 4mos agoActive 1wk ago

Should AI companies be required to pay royalties to creators whose work was used to train their models?

This issue is central to current class-action lawsuits where artists allege AI models were illegally built on their intellectual property. Proponents argue tech companies are strip-mining human creativity to automate artists out of a job without consent. Opponents contend that AI 'learns' patterns rather than copying files, and restrictive laws would stifle innovation and hand a monopoly to the few giants wealthy enough to pay licensing fees.

23 Replies

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...4mos4MO

Yes

 @BD2RCMRfrom Andorra la Vella  disagreed…2mos2MO

AI models work in the same way that humans do, they ingest, categorise and synthesise new outputs. Human artists do the same, just slower and to a lower quality. Cry baby luddites cowering before the future.

 @BD2RCMRfrom Andorra la Vella  disagreed…2mos2MO

AI models don't do anything different to human artists. Human artists synthesise all they have seen into new works, this is exactly what AI models do. The "yes" voters are just protectionist luddites cowering before progress.

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...4mos4MO

Yes, using creative work without permission is theft, regardless of the technology

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...4mos4MO

No

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...4mos4MO

No, AI learning is "fair use" just like a human reading a book

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...4mos4MO

Yes, we need a "Spotify for data" licensing model to fairly compensate creators

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...4mos4MO

No, mandatory fees would kill open-source and hand a monopoly to Big Tech

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...4mos4MO

Yes, but only for future models, as auditing old datasets is impossible

 @BF2KQ36answered…1wk1W

Shouldn’t be used without permission. This should be a crime.

 @BDTYTNVanswered…4wks4W

Yes, but only where mandatory permission is sought and approved from the individual creators.

 @BDMFJJJanswered…1mo1MO

There is no clear cut answer here.

 @9WTN5BT  from Maine  answered…1mo1MO

No, because while ethically ideal it isn't possible to enforce.

 @9WTN5BT  from Maine  answered…1mo1MO

How could it be enforced?

 @9WTN5BT  from Maine  answered…1mo1MO

It's impossible to enforce.

 @BDG43F9answered…2mos2MO

No. If the training data was aquired without consent, it shouldn't be sold at all.

 @BD823V9answered…2mos2MO

Ai companies should not only have to pay royalties, they should not exist in the first place. Ai needs to be abolished and is inherently harmful.

 @BD3RSHQanswered…2mos2MO

The same law should apply to AI as to humans

 @BCYSPRJanswered…2mos2MO

Yes, but minimal, or one off. Consider 'fair use' and the unspecificity of information for general use.

 @BCVD4G8answered…2mos2MO

AI should be banned from creating art like music or images

 @BCRH9QSanswered…2mos2MO

No, this would undermine the UK becoming an AI leader. But AI should be designed to credit its source materials - and then subject it to copyrights like Creative Commons.

 @BCQ6HJ7Labouranswered…3mos3MO

Yes, Ban AI for non-Medical or non-scientific use

 @4SNPK4B answered…3mos3MO

Yes, but I strongly favor banning generative AI entirely until it can be made genuinely safe.

Engagement

The historical activity of users engaging with this question.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...

More conversations

Join in on more popular conversations.

Active 2mos ago

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...…6yrs6Y

Should critical race theory be taught in K-12 education?

No

▲  19.8k6 replies4 agree1 disagree