Whose content is it, really?
SOMEWHAT LATE in the day, but, it is to be hoped, not too late, concern about the activities of the artificial intelligence industry is finding expression across the creative community.
Writers, musicians and publishers have realised that – yet again – Big Tech is taking us for a ride. Perhaps this time their protests of innocence will be taken more cyuically
When the internet was in its infancy Big Tech got away with murder – almost literally – by protesting that they were merely acting as conduits for the material – often as we now realise very damaging material – that users put out.
While conventional publishers must take responsibility for everything they put out, Big Tech would have none of it. Their specious claim to be defending 'free speech' has proved sufficient cover for them to hide behind and escape any responsiblity for what has turned out all too often to be very damaging.
The advertising revenue they have 'stolen" from more conventional media has proved to be highy detrimental to many media enterprises, particularly newspapers.
With the raids they have made on the creative community – 'stealing' content from writers, composers and artists to 'train' their creations – they have done and are doing immense damage to copyrighted material.
A number of lawsuits are now in train. Might it be possible to mount one enormous class action with the muscle to counter the mega power of Big Tech and their legal friends?
The storage of, especially creative, material in a digital age is of further concern. As these columns never tire of painting out, 'the Cloud' is not some cuddly, fluffy concept up there in the heavens, but an earth-based industry consuming vast amounts of energy and holding enormous amounts of valuable intellectual property in often dubious circumstances.
Have we finally got the measure of these self-styled 'public benefactors'? Maybe.