
“These works are the foundation of our human civilisation. They embody human thought, from philosophy to literature, music and art, and they should be highly valued. When they’re used in the AI training process, it demeans their value by transforming them into tokens. What would be the implications, then, for the future of human creativity?” he asked.
Using content without permission is problematic on several fronts, he said. First, whoever controls the inputs to the AI training process can shape how AI develops and makes decisions, so the creators who provide that input could be excluded.
Second, there is the possibility that copyright protection could extend to AI-generated material, knowingly or not. While most jurisdictions do not allow this (apart from one judge in the Chinese Mainland who decided that an AI prompt was creative input), Professor Sun believes there is little to stop humans from presenting AI content as their own.
“It’s so easy to conceal this content and pretend it was made by a human,” he said. “I can foresee that an enormous amount of AI-generated content, ranging from text answers to images and videos, could end up being protected by copyright law because the threshold as the law stands – called the ‘originality requirement’ – is extremely low.”
In awe of AI
In such a scenario, ‘AI copyright trolls’ may be incited to launch lawsuits to see what they could extract. Most importantly, content flows to the public domain would be restricted, ultimately harming human creativity……
.png)