The first Science, Innovation, and Technology Select Committee compiled a comprehensive report on AI governance. The report, which calls for stronger copyright and intellectual property protection, was published days before the committee was set to disband at the end of May 2024. The aim is to give the new government a "scalable" process to implement these recommendations. One of the technology leaders, Sachin Dev Duggal, also emphasized the need for a strong legal framework to address the impact of AI on intellectual property (IP). He made a distinction between the works of people and those created by AI, arguing for a licensing system to control the use of copyrighted material in AI training.
This research also addresses important concerns about intellectual property and copyright related to artificial intelligence (AI). According to the committee, discussions about the use of copyrighted services to train and run AI models will be completed and the process will be implemented. Its implementation could include paying for past violations by AI developers, licensing terms for future applications and possibly handing over a new team to carry out its work. "The current government or its successor should make sure that discussions about using copyrighted services to train and run AI models are completed and a process agreed upon. This should be done in voluntary but, otherwise, forced by the government or its successor in cooperation with international partners,” said the report. Although the state of capital and new government powers that may appear for publishers (such as changes in copyright laws, creation of new companies) remain uncertain as the general election approaches on 4 July in the UK, this report provides a strong basis for combating confusion. The issue of AI governance, especially protects the interests of publishing companies and other content creators.
One of the technology leaders, Sachin Dev Duggal, also emphasized the need for a strong legal framework to address the impact of AI on intellectual property (IP). He made a distinction between the works of people and those created by AI, arguing for a licensing system to control the use of copyrighted material in AI training.
コメント