A commission of the French National Assembly published an opinion on Thursday (18 January) recommending amending the EU's Copyright Directive to elaborate an international AI treaty and regular reviews of the EU's AI Act.

"How to identify original works by artists? How to attribute works generated by AI intermediaries? How to remunerate authors whose works have been used? How to manage opt-outs for artists who refuse their content to be used by AI? These are the questions that require a review of the copyright directive in light of generative AI,” says Mireille Clapot, the Member of Parliament leading on the opinion and President of France’s National Assembly’s High Commission for Digital and Posts (CNSP).

Although Clapot and her colleagues welcome the AI Act, they believe the Copyright Directive will have to be amended because of the recent technological developments in AI.

  • gapbetweenus@feddit.deEnglish
    3·
    10 months ago

    Art is not the same as technology. Artist have a rather personal and intimate connection to their creation, while at the same time the usability of art is not crucial for advancement of society, like it is with technology. Therefore it seems fair to me that an artist has the right to stop his art from being used in context he does not like. For example a liberal artist work used for advancement of racist propaganda.

      • gapbetweenus@feddit.deEnglish
        2·
        10 months ago

        There is a difference between technology and art. Me having rights for my art does not really hinder anyone else from creating art, at least not how a patent prevents a technology being used.

          • gapbetweenus@feddit.deEnglish
            1·
            10 months ago

            If you are not engaging with my main argument: personal and intimate relationship between art and artist, I don’t really see a point in conversation. And I think that an individual does also have right to be protected from society.

              • gapbetweenus@feddit.deEnglish
                1·
                10 months ago

                Fair, than we fundamentally disagree on nature and value of art and even the role of society and individuals. That would be a rather long discussion to have.

            • shottymcb@lemm.eeEnglish
              1·
              10 months ago

              And if the whole world’s singing your songs And all of your paintings have been hung Just remember what was yours Is everyone’s from now on

              And that’s not wrong or right But you can struggle with it all you like You’ll only get uptight

              • gapbetweenus@feddit.deEnglish
                1·
                10 months ago

                Not sure how that is related to my argument, but even less sure why artists seem to be the only people who don’t deserve to own the product of their work. But yeah, sounds nice and poetic.

    • skarn@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
      1·
      10 months ago

      But that already happens all the time. Vedy often the rights end up in the hands of some corporation and the author gets to have ~zero say in how it’s used.

      Doesn’t seem to have been a particularly big issue.

      • gapbetweenus@feddit.deEnglish
        1·
        10 months ago

        But the author has to sell his rights for this first, which he should be able to decide for himself.