Unfair Learning: GenAI Exceptionalism and Copyright Law
By: David Atkinson
Potential Business Impact:
AI can't copy art without paying for it.
This paper challenges the argument that generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is entitled to broad immunity from copyright law for reproducing copyrighted works without authorization due to a fair use defense. It examines fair use legal arguments and eight distinct substantive arguments, contending that every legal and substantive argument favoring fair use for GenAI applies equally, if not more so, to humans. Therefore, granting GenAI exceptional privileges in this domain is legally and logically inconsistent with withholding broad fair use exemptions from individual humans. It would mean no human would need to pay for virtually any copyright work again. The solution is to take a circumspect view of any fair use claim for mass copyright reproduction by any entity and focus on the first principles of whether permitting such exceptionalism for GenAI promotes science and the arts.
Similar Papers
The algorithmic muse and the public domain: Why copyrights legal philosophy precludes protection for generative AI outputs
Computers and Society
AI-made art belongs to everyone, not creators.
Who Owns the Knowledge? Copyright, GenAI, and the Future of Academic Publishing
Digital Libraries
Protects artists' work from being used to train AI.
Open Shouldn't Mean Exempt: Open-Source Exceptionalism and Generative AI
Computers and Society
Makes AI developers follow same rules as others.