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
      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.

      • Deceptichum@kbin.social
        41·
        10 months ago

        Once your art is in the wild and enjoyed by society, it belongs to everyone. Hoarding art ownership is how you get stupid shit like Happy Birthday being copyrighted.

        Look at Internet culture, like for example Steamed Hams, it spawned a wave of creative works and interpretations, and these works unite people across the globe with a shared commonality. Something technically not legal in many places, but luckily Disney/Fox haven’t gone and cracked down on it.

        We need to protect the best interests of society as a whole, not rights holders.

        • gapbetweenus@feddit.deEnglish
          11·
          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.

          • Deceptichum@kbin.social
            2·
            10 months ago

            I don’t value your main argument.

            I think the needs of the many outweigh the feelings of the artist.

            It’s the next level of the death of the author. The authors connection to the work is irrelevant compare to the readers.

            Give the artist a reasonable time frame to earn some money off their work if they want and let it go free.

            • 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.

          • shottymcbEnglish
            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.