We need an assumed and exclusive right to our own likenesses and fast.
We do, AI companies just don't respect it.
More importantly, platforms don't respect it. Any malicious outside actor shouldn't be allowed to their malice.
Doesn't even matter. The systems they built for copyright enforcement are absolute shit and easily abused if you have a lot of money, as designed. And with AI added to the mix, it's all automated so none of it will work as it should and they don't care to fix it. Disney or whoever can just launch constant copyright claims and cripple small IP owners even when they're completely in the wrong.
If we all know this why hasn't there been a class action lawsuit, and don't give me the arbitration keeps people from trying. As we have learned with this American administration, do it fast enough that the courts can't respond amd maybe you can force it.
Beware: AI companies really want to sell a terrible solution to the problem they created.
Well, we're not buying the product, so maybe they can extort us into paying to solve a problem instead.
Lets not throw out freedom of panorama because of AI.
What does that have to do with anything here?? I don't know about you, but my likeness is not permanently located in a public space...
Freedom of panorama (FoP) is a provision in the copyright laws of various jurisdictions that permits taking photographs and video footage and creating other images (such as paintings) of buildings and sometimes sculptures and other art works which are permanently located in a public space, without infringing on any copyright that may otherwise subsist in such works, and the publishing of such images.
I'm not sure of the correct term. It should be obvious though that if anyone can copyright claim their own image, it would basically make taking photos in many public places impossible.
It's not impossible at all. You just have to blur the faces and any identifying marks unless you've obtained explicit consent. Kind people already do this regularly.
Misleading title. This isn't an "AI Company". As far as I can tell, it's some scammer that used AI Tools to create similar music and then copyright strike the original artist to steal their revenue.
The major issue here is how YouTube handles these claims. From the article:
YouTube’s dispute process places enormous trust in whoever files the claim, with little built-in protection for independent artists who lack legal resources.
This isn't something new and was already being done before AI tools were available.
Same scam as before, just made a lot easier by AI bullshit unfortunately.
I remember I like 2007 YouTube removed one of my videos I made of a glitch in runescape because some else also posted a video and they copyright struke my videoto remove it. I made the video, with my character, just showing the same glitch. There were zero resources to fight it.
I think the most important question is: do they have an address? A flammable one?
The problem is not an "AI company" but Google being evil and AI making scamming so much more efficient. I had the habit of using youtube as music player in the background (with ublock of course). This has become incredibly miserable and I finall freed myself from that and rather pay qobuz a decent amount of money from now one, for much better quality and much more money actually ending up with the artists and no scam BS like the above. Oh and also active removal of AI music slop, in case it even makes it there.
I think YouTube has a lot of room for improvement but why are people still so ignorant about the DMCA and the obligations of platforms to maintain safe-harbour status? YouTube must take down content on claim or open itself up to being legally liable for all user generated content. This Tom Scott video is still relevant https://youtu.be/1Jwo5qc78QU
No true scammer.
Something something YouTube's copyright system is still broken af and easy to exploit. I wonder how much more abuse it takes for YouTube to finally do something
Maybe if it starts costing them money. Until then, nope.
Not to be rude, but this website looks like AI, and I don't think these authors are real.
Because YouTube’s copyright claim system operates without individual human review of each dispute
Bots telling bots that humans aren't human...
There's an easy solution to this:
Legislation that requires giant trillion dollar companies actually employ living breathing humans who can perform a task rather than automate it despite that not working and then just not caring.
And people are going to say that's hard...
But all we need to do is pass a single law that says if AI fucks up, the CEO of the company is personally and financially liable because he's the one that ultimately entrusted the task to AI.
Do that, and suddenly corps wouldn't hand everything to AI as intentional incompetence.
If we don't do it soon, corps will just blame AI for everything and declare no one is ever at fault
An AI can never be held accountable, therefore an AI must ~~never~~ always make a management decision.
I mean, the concept of a corporation was created as a consequence dodge to begin with…
Kind of?
Like a thousand years ago in Italy the concept started.
A guy with a bunch of money, would give a guy with no money and a boat the funds to buy cargo and ship it.
If something bad happened the guy with the boat an no money was liable for the loss of cargo, and wouldn't have the funds to pay, they'd just go bankrupt.
If nothing bad happened, the guy with no money paid back the investor plus profits.
Then it evolved into government enforced monopolies like "East India Trading Co".
Which are more like modern corps, but less like what you're talking about but I'm pretty sure that's what you meant and not the earlier Italian corporations?
I think you are missing hundreds of years of progressive corporate lawyering to entrench their business model(s) into our society.
Take the US for example. Originally corporations had to be for the public good, were time limited, and the owners were held directly financially accountable for their decisions.
It took hundreds of years of court cases and lobbying to get to the point where we are now and it is absolutely insane. There is a reason the corporation has become the dominant form of our culture.
This feels like the kind of slam dunk legal case some law firm would be happy to take on contingency. People will keep doing this if there are no consequences.
Seriously it seems like the real winners with our current landscape are the lawyers.
You can pretty much always assume that's the case with the US legal system. The lawyers always win, sometimes their clients do as well but that's a lot rarer.
The lawyers always win
Steven Robert Donziger (born September 14, 1961) is an American former attorney known for his legal battles with Chevron, particularly Aguinda v. Texaco, Inc. and other cases in which he represented over 30,000 farmers and Indigenous people who suffered environmental damage and health problems caused by oil drilling in the Lago Agrio oil field of Ecuador. The Ecuadorian court awarded the plaintiffs $9.5 billion ($13 billion in 2024 dollars) in damages, which led Chevron to withdraw its assets from Ecuador and launch legal action against Donziger in the US. In 2011, Chevron filed a RICO (anti-corruption) suit against Donziger in New York City. The case was heard by US District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, who determined that the ruling of the Ecuadorian court could not be enforced in the US because it was procured by fraud, bribery, and racketeering activities. As a result of this case, Donziger was disbarred from practicing law in New York in 2018.
Donziger was placed under house arrest in August 2019 while awaiting trial on charges of criminal contempt of court, which arose during his appeal against Kaplan's RICO decision, when he refused to turn over electronic devices he owned to Chevron's forensics experts. In July 2021, US District Judge Loretta Preska found him guilty, and Donziger was sentenced to 6 months in jail in October 2021. While Donziger was under house arrest in 2020, twenty-nine Nobel laureates described the actions taken by Chevron against him as "judicial harassment." Human rights campaigners called Chevron's actions an example of a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP). In April 2021, six members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus demanded that the Department of Justice review Donziger's case. In September 2021, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights stated that the pre-trial detention imposed on Donziger was illegal and called for his release. Having spent 45 days in prison and a combined total of 993 days under house arrest, Donziger was released on April 25, 2022
Which lawyers? Clearly Chevron's lawyers were able to absolve all their liability so they definitely won.
Furthermore, Chevron extracted close to 30 billion dollars of petroleum and left an environmental disaster behind. Chevron even counter sued and was awarded an addition 3 billion in damages that was reduced to 220 million for Ecuador daring to try and hold a US corporation responsible.
Not only did Chevron prevail they continued the harassment of Steven keeping him under confinement for years and preventing him from practicing law.
On what grounds? Google's terms of service say they can take down anything they want for any reason. If someone starts a copyright case you can go go court, but all this is carefully/legally designed such that there is no downsides to "mistakes"
Theft of her revenue. I don’t know that she could get it to a criminal level but civil probably.
EDIT: and not suing Google but Vidya and Timeless Sounds IR
Defamation and/or tortious interference possibly?
There are lots of options - if you have a few million dollars to pay the lawyers. If you win you get that back. Sometimes lawyers will accept cases on pay only if you win - but generally only if they are sure of winning which this doesn't seem to me. Still check with a lawyer if you want to consider it.
But Google isn't taking it down for any reason, they're giving someone else the revenue for the young woman's work.
Oh damn, I love Murphy. Sucks to she her getting targeted by AI scammers.
Are we being serious right now bro?!
That fabricated music was then distributed across platforms using a company called Vydia.
Definately not Leather Jacket Man of nVidia...
Given the current media, copyright, and business environment, why haven't we seen this kind of reverse-piracy pursued as a deliberate business model? Buy some IP rights cheap from YouTube "content creators" who have given up, use your AI-powered robot to find vaguely similar stuff from creators who are still working, and copyright-claim it all?
It's pretty evident there would be no downside.
Maybe small YouTubers should get together and create such a business, just to force the system to change. Make copyright claims against Paramount, CBS, etc. Make them barely plausible. Make thousands of them, from behind a rotating cast of shell companies. Make AI-powered, trust-the-claimant style copyright claims unworkable. Hey, it's just the free market regulating itself.
It is a business model: patent trolls'.
Copyright claims are under penalty of perjury - you can go to prison for making them in bad faith.
What Patamount/CBS/etc are doing is not a copyright claim, it is a backdoor google has given them - but not you - that lets them bypass the legal process and get things taken down - but if they are wrong there is no legal issue for them. From the outside it looks exactly like a copyright claim, and in spirit it is - by legally it is not a copyright claim in important ways.
If "Vydia" can get access to this mechanism, it can't be that hard, can it?
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
