The Necessity of Copyright Protection in the Age of LLMs

While it’s important, in the age of LLMs, to protect the rights of creators, it is useful to acknowledge the inherent hypocrisy of some in the calls for stricter copyright enforcement. Many of those advocating for stringent protections have themselves benefited from the very practices they now decry.

The music industry is a story of appropriation

The music industry provides a glaring example of this hypocrisy. For decades, musicians and record labels have engaged in practices that stretch the boundaries of copyright law. From the unauthorised sampling of songs to disputes over signwriting credits, the industry has a long history of appropriation and exploitation. Countless blues and rock musicians of the early 20th century found their work appropriated by more prominent artists and labels, with little to no acknowledgment or compensation.

It could be argued that over the past 50 years, much of music has been reinterpretation rather than true originality. Genres evolve by blending past styles, and practices like sampling blur lines between inspiration and creation, reflecting music’s nature of building on shared cultural influences.

Yet, as AI systems like LLMs begin to generate music that rivals human creativity, the same industry players are now decrying this as a violation of their intellectual property. This irony is not lost on those who have been on the receiving end of such practices. While it is crucial to protect the rights of musicians and ensure they are fairly compensated for their work, it is equally important to recognise that the music industry has thrived on the loose interpretation of copyright laws, arguing that art evolves through reinterpretation and that no idea exists in a vacuum.

Scientific Research: Building on the Shoulders of Giants

In the realm of science, the concept of “standing on the shoulders of giants” is deeply ingrained. Researchers build upon the work of their predecessors, often drawing heavily on existing knowledge and data to make new discoveries. This collaborative and iterative process is fundamental to scientific progress. Yet, as AI systems begin to generate novel insights and innovations, some in the scientific community are calling for stricter copyright protections.

The hypocrisy here is that many of these same researchers have benefited from the open sharing of knowledge and data. The very foundation of scientific research is built on the principle of collaboration and the free exchange of ideas. While it is essential to protect the intellectual property of researchers and ensure they receive credit for their work, it is also crucial to acknowledge that scientific progress has always relied on the collective efforts of many.

Some argue that science has lagged over the past 50 years due to a lack of open sharing, with patents, proprietary research, and competition for funding often keeping valuable findings behind closed doors. Unlike the early scientific tradition of freely sharing discoveries, modern research often prioritises individual credit and commercial gain, limiting the collaborative potential for breakthroughs. AI thrives on open access to data, yet calls for stricter copyright protections around AI-generated insights contradict the need for a more collaborative approach.

Fiction Writing: Inspiration and Adaptation

In the world of literature, the boundaries of copyright have been tested for centuries. Writers and publishers have drawn heavily on public domain works, historical events, and even each other’s writings to create new content. This practice has been accepted, even celebrated, as part of the literary tradition. Yet, as AI systems like GPT-3 begin to produce text that can mimic human writing, the publishing industry has expressed concern over what it sees as a potential threat to the sanctity of copyright.

This concern seems hypocritical when one considers the long-standing tradition of borrowing, adapting, and repurposing that has characterised literary creation for centuries. While it is important to protect the rights of authors and ensure they are compensated for their work, it is also necessary to recognise that creativity has always been a collaborative and iterative process. The act of creation, whether human or machine, is fundamentally an act of synthesis, drawing on existing influences to produce something new.

Balancing Protection and Progress

The push for copyright enforcement in the age of LLMs highlights a tension between the desire to protect intellectual property and the reality of how creativity actually works. Many of those calling for stricter enforcement have themselves benefited from a more fluid interpretation of copyright laws, engaging in practices that would likely be scrutinised under the standards they now advocate.

While it is crucial to address the ethical and legal implications of AI-generated content, doing so requires a balanced approach that acknowledges the complexities of creativity. We must confront the inconsistencies in our approach to copyright and acknowledge that creativity, by its very nature, defies rigid ownership. By recognising the collaborative and iterative nature of creativity, we can develop a more nuanced and fair framework for protecting intellectual property in the age of AI.

First published on Curam-Ai