

Hollywood Urges Trump To Not Let AI Companies 'Exploit' Copyrighted Works (variety.com) 79
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Variety: More than 400 Hollywood creative leaders signed an open letter to the Trump White House's Office of Science and Technology Policy, urging the administration to not roll back copyright protections at the behest of AI companies. The filmmakers, writers, actors, musicians and others -- which included Ben Stiller, Mark Ruffalo, Cynthia Erivo, Cate Blanchett, Cord Jefferson, Paul McCartney, Ron Howard and Taika Waititi -- were submitting comments for the Trump administration's U.S. AI Action Plan. The letter specifically was penned in response to recent submissions to the Office of Science and Technology Policy from OpenAI and Google, which asserted that U.S. copyright law allows (or should allow) allow AI companies to train their system on copyrighted works without obtaining permission from (or compensating) rights holders.
"We firmly believe that America's global AI leadership must not come at the expense of our essential creative industries," the letter says in part. The letter claims that "AI companies are asking to undermine this economic and cultural strength by weakening copyright protections for the films, television series, artworks, writing, music and voices used to train AI models at the core of multibillion-dollar corporate valuations." [...] The letter says Google and OpenAI "are arguing for a special government exemption so they can freely exploit America's creative and knowledge industries, despite their substantial revenues and available funds. There is no reason to weaken or eliminate the copyright protections that have helped America flourish." You can read the full statement and list of signatories here.
The letter was issued in response to recent submissions from OpenAI (PDF) and Google (PDF) claiming that U.S. law allows, or should allow, AI companies to train their programs on copyrighted works under the fair use legal doctrine.
"We firmly believe that America's global AI leadership must not come at the expense of our essential creative industries," the letter says in part. The letter claims that "AI companies are asking to undermine this economic and cultural strength by weakening copyright protections for the films, television series, artworks, writing, music and voices used to train AI models at the core of multibillion-dollar corporate valuations." [...] The letter says Google and OpenAI "are arguing for a special government exemption so they can freely exploit America's creative and knowledge industries, despite their substantial revenues and available funds. There is no reason to weaken or eliminate the copyright protections that have helped America flourish." You can read the full statement and list of signatories here.
The letter was issued in response to recent submissions from OpenAI (PDF) and Google (PDF) claiming that U.S. law allows, or should allow, AI companies to train their programs on copyrighted works under the fair use legal doctrine.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Forget money. AI has Elon who will tell Trump what to do. Plus, Trump hates Hollywood.
When I saw the list of people the summary said were on this petition, it was like they were trying to get Trump to side with AI companies more. I don't know everyone on the list, but it is a pretty liberal list of people. And more Bernie Sanders / AOC than moderate Democrat.
I would suggest Hollywood try to use reverse psychology instead by saying they want AI companies to use their work without permission. It still won't work, but it's a better idea than trying to get Trump to side with hyper-liberals inste
Might they puchase a DMCA repeal? (Score:2)
If you're right, then we may have an opportunity. Aside from torrenting (which gets you deliciously pre-processed plaintext media without ads, perfect for AIs to "read"), how are AI companies getting scrapeable plaintext media right now? Surely some of them (but not Facebook, heh) are violating DMCA in order to read the data.
They have incentive to repeal DMCA. Trump won't be president forever, and once he's gone, the DoJ will reopen, and these businesses might find themselves looking at enormous legal probl
Re: Might they puchase a DMCA repeal? (Score:2)
It would be better idea from a policy and PR perspective to make this battle about over eating copyright law and DRM I agree but it is not and the AI companies are pretty transparent that this is *not what this is about. None of these companies have in mind that a repeal of DMCA means their data also goes DRM and copyright free, kinda defeats their business model which is what they are protecting here.
AI is right for the wrong reasons (Disney's heavy hand on their content is bad for everyone bit mainly th
Re: (Score:2)
Then there's the fact that Hollywood is famously leftist and Trump seems to delight in punishing those who disagree with him. Meanwhile, tech bros seem to be "in" for conservatives right now.
Re: (Score:2)
Then there's the fact that Hollywood is famously leftist
This line never fails to make me laugh and is a general telling of how terribly messed up the political scene has gotten.
You are conflating Hollywood showing mixed race couples and openly trans characters with leftism; when you won't find a viler bunch of Fat Old Rich People who have mastered all the secret arts of tax evasion, sued everyone and their mothers to protect their copyrights, and have stood as valiantly by their honorable codes as their monetary goals allowed (check the difference between movie
Re: (Score:3)
You are conflating Hollywood showing mixed race couples and openly trans characters with leftism
No, I am not at all doing this. My statement has zero to do with culture war nonsense, Hollywood creatives have always been famously leftist. What YOU are doing is conflating Hollywood's business people who run everything with its creatives who are the ones signing this petition. Notice it mentions it's "creatives" who are signing this petition in the first line of the summary.
The people you are talking about would love for AI to be dominant in their business as it means no or at least less royalties for th
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
Like Hollywood exploits everyone else? (Score:5, Insightful)
They also want to take but never give back: Disney strip mined the public domain and wants everyone to think Snow White and everything else was their idea.
Re:Like Hollywood exploits everyone else? (Score:5, Insightful)
historic exploitations aside, aren't these the same exec studios that are facing union/guild strikes because they're wanting to roll talent into digital prints they can automate forever? with voices probably being most imminent
(though i imagine they're really just arguing over who gets how much)
so yeah, the industry has never given half a fuck about muh innovation or protecting creatives or whatever the theater is termed now, just legal tug-of-war and staying king of the IP hill
You're talking about the wrong people (Score:2)
These are the industry's creatives signing this petition, not the people truly running things. Notice the names they list, I dont see the CEO of Disney anywhere on that list.
Re: (Score:2)
Rich & famous SAG/AFTRA members don't have much credibility here: they will defend the golden goose no matter what. It's like the small percentage of winners who defend the bloodsucking PROs (ASCAP/BMI/SESAC in the USA) in the music world--and I say this as a recording artist with label releases.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe you should read the list. I see a bunch of PGA members, and DGA is also out in force.
I also dont see a single corporate head listed here. Where's the CEO of Disney since you brought Disney up? Where are at least senior members of the company? How about MGM, Paramount, or Sony? No? That's because you're conflating creative types with the actions of the corporations they work for.
Remember that Hollywood strike that was only two years ago? That was people just like the ones signing this petition (in most cases it included very specifically the people listed here) protesting against more AI inv
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Or you have your head up your ass and dont want to admit it.
Re: (Score:2)
If they produced something more watchable, on average, I might have more sympathy.
Re: (Score:2)
Pretending those fat cats are a bunch of penniless auteurs is a special kind of headassery.
Of course I'm not doing that all. One again you're conflating the people who run Hollywood with creatives.
The people on that list of signatories are not responsible for anything you laid at their feet. Most are just actors and even for those who sometimes work as producers they are only working for the people that are responsible for your complaints. These are not at all the people that control Hollywood.
Begging Hitler for help? (Score:1, Flamebait)
These were the people who called Trump a Nazi just a few months ago.
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
*Hitler invaded atleast 4 countries
* Trump - none
* Hilter persecuted, and gassed thousands of People.
* Trump - None
yep - he's hitler
Re:Begging Hitler for help? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: Begging Hitler for help? (Score:1, Flamebait)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You're really gonna get mad at him for attacking ISIS and the Houthis? So terrorism and openly attack neutral shipping and the US military hundreds of times is good now?
Propping up the oil industry.
On a different note, if we drop the copyright back to 7 years, renewable once for a grand total of 14, then sure.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow it didn't take the Godwin effect much time at all to show up.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
1. Supporting Russian invasion of Ukraine.
2. Rolling back pollution laws -- which will kill a significant number of people.
3. Threatening to take over Gaza for his resort business.
4. Threatening to take over Panama for the canal.
5. Threatening to take over Greenland.
6. Talking about taking over Canada -- through use of tariffs as leverage.
7. Trying to take over the Gulf of Mexico.
He's well on his way...
Re: Begging Hitler for help? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're giving too many of the above's points credit :)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Begging Hitler for help? (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:3)
*Hitler invaded atleast 4 countries * Trump - none
Yet. He's threatened a few already, though, so now all he needs is a pretense.
* Hilter persecuted, and gassed thousands of People. * Trump - None
I guess you missed this weekend when he sold a couple hundred people to a slave prison in El Salvador.
Re: (Score:2)
I guess you missed this weekend when he sold a couple hundred people to a slave prison in El Salvador.
And in direct violation of a court order.
Re: (Score:2)
I value my presidential decree higher
Signed, Donald J. Trump
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
And yes, it is also appropriate to compare Trump to Hitler. His administration is overtly acting like the Nazi Party did wen it ended democracy in Germany.
History itself is worthless. It is too easy to misinterpret, cherry pick and recast events into preferable contexts in order to extract any justification or ideology anyone feels like extracting. The world would be far better off if everyone traded their history lessons for a psych textbook.
Re: (Score:2)
The KKK was founded by Democrats as the militant/terrorist wing of the party after they lost the Civil War. Then they implemented Jim Crowe and segregation.
Re:Begging Hitler for help? (Score:5, Insightful)
These were the people who called Trump a Nazi just a few months ago.
Nazi? Noooo, Trump is more of a Fascist autocrat with strong monarchist tendencies.
Re: (Score:2)
Who is this "Hollywood" you speak of? You seem so sure of it, it must be an individual rather than an abstracted collective.
Name some names.
Re: (Score:1)
"Hollywood" used the words "nazi and hitler"? You are aware that Hollywood is not some kind of singular entity arent you?
Re: (Score:2)
These were the people who called Trump a Nazi just a few months ago.
Nazi? Noooo, Trump is more of a Fascist autocrat with strong monarchist tendencies.
No, hollywood used the words "nazi" and "hitler", they didn't use any of the words you just said.
Haven't you watched the news even once this past month?
And I disagree with that. Your point?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
A Fascist would NEVER reduce the size, scope or authority of the central government.
Reall? So far I have only seen him reduce the parts of it that he doesn't like or that could check his power.
It's no steal nor exploit if (Score:3, Interesting)
they just pay once per movie.
I'm too allowed to train my brain with a movie and then build/draw/sing/program whatever i want with that knowledge. .. should not be too expensive for those ai companies to just rent out every book and every movie in existance just for the duration of reading the data once, not making a copy, but using it for 'training'. That's what copyright law is for, do we really need any change here?
Re: (Score:2)
hould not be too expensive for those ai companies to just rent out every book and every movie in existance just for the duration of reading the data once, not making a copy, but using it for 'training'.
If they want to use it to train future models, they're going to either have to rent it again, or buy it. The argument is in large part about their storage of training sets of copyrighted information they haven't paid for. By the exact same copyright laws that these same corporations lobbied for, they are guilty of thousands to millions of instances of criminal copyright infringement.
Cat's Out Of The Bag (Score:4, Interesting)
This is just a performative exercise, for an audience that arguably expects it. (even though it really has no purpose whatsoever, and will accomplish exactly nothing)
Copyright did good when it was all about physical goods and distribution. It started showing signs of being dysfunctional at the dawn of the digital age, and its lobby's staunch effort to not adapt to new realities started to create stress points. When AI's disruptive effects started to get noticed, it was already too late. I'm not saying I'm jumping up and down about it, but it's the new reality, and there's ain't a doggone thing any of these megacorps (copyright cartels) and their lawyers wielding IP laws as an adversarial tool are going to be able to do about it.
The going was good while it lasted. Far from being overjoyed about it, thinking about our many friends in the creative professions who depend on this income for their livelihood. But I just don't see it going backwards. The sum total of published human knowledge, encapsulated and distilled, now available at our fingertips.
Time to start leveraging these new tools, however primitive they are today, they will soon get much better. This is the nature of reality: it keeps shifting and evolving, most times out of our control.
Re: Cat's Out Of The Bag (Score:2)
Hollywood is urging the wrong person (Score:3)
If Hollywood wants to dramatically expand existing copyright regimes to exert control over who can learn or benefit from copyrighted works they should be asking congress to pass new laws. The president does not have the power to change the law.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The president does not have the power to change the law.
No, but he seems to be able to "re-interpret" or ignore it whenever convenient, whether that's via whatever stack of executive orders the Heritage Foundation place in front of him that day, or through whatever incoherent rambling he spouts off to the sycophantic media he permitted to listen.
And let's not pretend he doesn't hold the strings over the people who do have the power to change laws, who are either part of the cult or too afraid to question it.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
The president has no such authority.
Executive orders apply to the federal government not the people. The president can't create or change existing law via executive order. Their power is limited to whatever is delegated by enabling legislation.
And who's going to tell him that?
Re: (Score:2)
Trump has already violated several court orders telling him he was exceeding his authority https://www.nbcnews.com/politi... [nbcnews.com] . He doesn't seem to care and sadly with a Republican majority of lapdogs in congress things are going to have to get a shit ton worse before they'll even think about doing anything about his brazenly unconstitutional actions.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, he has at least 60 votes in the Senate. That ten of them happen to be technically registered to another party, has turned out to be an irrelevant red herring.
And in the House, he has at least half with strict his-party-ness.
No need (Score:2)
No need to let Big AI steal from copyrighted material (mostly Big Hollywood).
Big Hollywood (looking especially sideways at you, house of mouse), been stealing from Public Domain for years. Go to the source and skip the middleman.
Of course stealing from Public Domain and stopping new works from entering Public Domain, but I digress.
Re: (Score:2)
Big Hollywood (looking especially sideways at you, house of mouse), been stealing from Public Domain for years.
You cannot steal from the public domain, and not only because copyright infringement is by definition not theft. Anyone is free to tell the same stories that someone else is telling from the public domain, as long as they tell it differently (or more true to the source material, where the two are similar.)
Why Trump? (Score:2)
Most of current video AI is coming from China. Trump is the wrong person to ask, he can at most stop companies like OpenAI which already struggle to keep up with the Chinese companies anyway.
Train AI using existing AI (Score:2)
What about non-creatives? (Score:2)
Presumably the people complaining are quite happy to use AI to answer questions based on scientific or factual information - without any payment to the researchers, explorers and thinkers who found the answers.
So let me get this straight (Score:2)
This collection of folks are appealing to which side of the President's nature?
- The side that values making sure individuals are compensated
- The side that believes in reining in massive companies
- The side that has a strong sense of fairness
I mean, clearly this will end well for them.
AI copyrights (Score:2)
Make New Stories Then, Not Perpetual Remakes (Score:2)
Let the creative get back to creating things that are new and leave the stories already told to AI and public domain.
Big-IP has already lost this war (Score:2)
Western AIs may abide by copyright, Chinese AIs won't.
Why isn't it fair use? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Unless they use the analog hole (point a camera at a screen) they need to decode and rip the stream, thereby violating DMCA. So they're going to need to buy some kind of change to the law, Fair Use notwithstanding. (Unless they analog hole, which sounds practical at first but might be too slow/inefficient.)
I do happen to think watching the video (whether you're a human or a computer) i
Prey Begging to the Wolf (Score:2)
Fair use? (Score:2)
Since AI is entirely commercial use, I am not sure where fair use comes into play.