Advertisement · 728 × 90

Posts by

Thanks for highlighting this. It's nothing more nor less than a proposal to legalise automated theft, as long as it's done by large companies.

1 year ago 4 0 0 0
Post image

Today, the UK government announced a proposal to change copyright law - for the benefit of AI companies - that would cause huge, irreversible harm to creators.

More info below, but most importantly here's what you can do (wherever you live):

1. Email your MP. Template letter in 🧵 👇

1/10

1 year ago 5377 4127 175 637
Post image

Worth reading the thread.
x.com/ednewtonrex/...

2 years ago 0 1 0 0
- Broad new copyright exception for commercial generative AI training. AI companies will be able to train on British copyrighted work without a licence, even if the AI model is designed to compete with the creators whose work is trained on. This would make the UK one of the most punitive jurisdictions for creators in the world.
- Rights holders can 'reserve their rights', i.e. opt out. But opt-outs don't work (you can't successfully opt out downstream copies of your work), most creators miss the chance to opt-out, doing so is a huge admin burden, etc. AI companies should be getting opt-in consent - it's unfair to shift the burden to creators.
- AI companies must offer some level of transparency over their training data. This would be good if presented on its own, but it's much less helpful if you're packaging it up with a broad copyright exception that lets AI companies train on most of the UK's creative output with impunity.

The consultation on these proposals lasts for 10 weeks. Anyone who cares about this issue should do whatever they can to make their views known to government now - there will only be one chance.

- Broad new copyright exception for commercial generative AI training. AI companies will be able to train on British copyrighted work without a licence, even if the AI model is designed to compete with the creators whose work is trained on. This would make the UK one of the most punitive jurisdictions for creators in the world. - Rights holders can 'reserve their rights', i.e. opt out. But opt-outs don't work (you can't successfully opt out downstream copies of your work), most creators miss the chance to opt-out, doing so is a huge admin burden, etc. AI companies should be getting opt-in consent - it's unfair to shift the burden to creators. - AI companies must offer some level of transparency over their training data. This would be good if presented on its own, but it's much less helpful if you're packaging it up with a broad copyright exception that lets AI companies train on most of the UK's creative output with impunity. The consultation on these proposals lasts for 10 weeks. Anyone who cares about this issue should do whatever they can to make their views known to government now - there will only be one chance.


And this is summary of the government's proposal by @ednewtonrex.bsky.social . He explains why he feels it's so problematic:

He has a full post of everything I shared on twitter/x. If you can, please send him thanks and support for all this information!
x.com/ednewtonrex/...

1 year ago 69 25 0 0
Post image

Wow we’re approaching 30k signatures.

Its clear the people want an end to the badger cull, and we have to make the government listen.

Help us reach 100k here: petition.parliament.uk/petitions/700317

1 year ago 79 39 2 1

Wasn't expecting to get followers before I even posted anything - thanks! Still, I only planned to bookmark this ready for a slow move from the other place, where I've only posted short #smallbiztips for years. What should I post here, then? What are you expecting?

1 year ago 1 0 0 0
Post image

Land doesn’t vote. Stop pretending it does.

1 year ago 58409 12979 1546 622