Authors’ body tries to mobilise writers over AI copyright
Growing concerns over the development of artificial intelligence has compelled the ALCS (Authors’ Licensing and Collecting Authority) - which recovers money for authors that they are due – to issue advice to members on how to respond to a government consultation on AI and copyright.
In its advice to members – headlined “Your rights are under threat. It’s time to have your say!” – the ALCS warns: “The Government’s preferred solution is to introduce a copyright exception for the use of works to train AI models, with the ability of rightsholders to ‘reserve their rights’ or ‘opt their works out’. We believe that this option is inadequate, unworkable and unbalanced against the interests of creators.”
It warns that “a model which requires individual creators to ‘opt-out’ is both deeply unfair and unworkable from a technical perspective. This option puts the onus firmly on the creators to reassert their existing legal rights, rather than on the tech companies to ask for permission. Creators cannot reasonably be expected to track every use of their work online to enforce their rights by opting out. This is likely to result in many rightsholders having their works unknowingly/unwillingly used for commercial purposes without any renumeration.”
There have been concerns about AI in the poetry world for some time. Recently the Guardian reported that poems written by AI were preferred by non-expert poetry readers to those written by humans, according to a US study.
The study, conducted by researchers at the University of Pittsburgh, showed participants poems written by 10 famous English-language poets along with poems generated in the style of those poets by ChatGPT 3.5.
Real and imitation works by poets such as Chaucer, Shakespeare, Byron, Walt Whitman, Emily Dickinson, TS Eliot, Allen Ginsberg, and Sylvia Plath were presented to participants. The odds of a poem written by a human being judged as human-authored were roughly 75% that of an AI-generated poem being judged as human-authored.
The study also found that participants ranked AI-generated poems higher in terms of overall quality than human-written poems. The authors suggested that non-expert readers preferred AI-generated poems because they found them more straightforward and accessible.
As the technology develops rapidly, AI is becoming increasingly expert at writing poetry very quickly - poetry that is quite acceptable to some readers.
Uilleam Ó Ceallaigh
Wed 12th Feb 2025 10:25
I read poetry because I want to know what the author (who I trust is a fellow human) thinks about x, y or z.
My reaction to such a poem may range from violent dissagreement, total apathy, or passionate endorsement of their views.
If, on the other hand, a human should get their pet monkey to hit keys at random on a typewriter, for an infinite amount of time, thus producing a copy of the complete works of Shakespeare, and then ask me for my opinion about the "quality" of those works, my reply would be:
A, the production of such content was a statistical inevitability,
B, the content was not dependent on the monkey's “emotions”,
C, you are as thick as three short planks, if you think I ought to be impressed by the content! 😐