Google, the tech giant known for pushing the boundaries of innovation, now finds itself at the center of a mounting legal storm. The company is reportedly under fire due to its use of copyrighted material from large-scale news publishers such as Daily Mail and CNN in the development of Bard, its cutting-edge Generative AI program. Today we delve deeper into the controversy that is causing ripple effects across the tech and content creation industries.
A significant number – about a million articles were apparently used without permission or knowledge of the publishers, according to some anonymous sources. The breakdown of this staggering number reveals approximately 75% of these articles belong to Daily Mail and the remaining 25% are sourced from CNN’s website. It is thought that Google professed a preference for these sites due to their style of summarizing articles in bullet points at the start of each piece. Allegedly, this distilled format allowed Google’s engineers to put Bard through its paces by offering up bullet point summaries with missing segments for the AI to complete.
In the bustling and dynamic world of artificial intelligence, the issue of copyright infringement has emerged as a key concern. This incident has sparked fears among creators and publishers over the possible adverse effects of Generative AI on content creation and ownership.
Despite this controversy, all entities directly concerned, including Google, Daily Mail General Trust (DMGT – the publisher of the Daily Mail), and CNN, have remained tight-lipped and declined to comment on these reports.
The situation puts Google under additional pressure, as it follows another recent lawsuit in the US. In the prior case, eight plaintiffs accused the tech behemoth of illegal use of copyrighted content and personal information to train its AI products. The stakes are high for Google, with potential penalties reaching up to $5 billion should they be found guilty.
In an era where AI advancements are rapidly increasing, the results of these lawsuits could have far-reaching consequences, potentially redefining our understanding of copyright law as applied to AI learning and development.
As Google deals with this legal firestorm, it highlights the ongoing debates and challenges on the path to AI progression. It underscores the need for law and ethics to keep pace with technological advancements. We are indeed living in an era of rapid evolution, where the virtual landscape is pushing real-world legal boundaries.
As tech companies continue to develop AI programs using vast amounts of web-based data, the question of intellectual property rights and AI-led content infringements becomes even more critical. Stay tuned as we keep a close eye on how this drama unfolds. This would indeed shape the future of AI, copyright laws, and might set new precedents in the tech world.
Up until working with Casey, we had only had poor to mediocre experiences outsourcing work to agencies. Casey & the team at CJ&CO are the exception to the rule.
Communication was beyond great, his understanding of our vision was phenomenal, and instead of needing babysitting like the other agencies we worked with, he was not only completely dependable but also gave us sound suggestions on how to get better results, at the risk of us not needing him for the initial job we requested (absolute gem).
This has truly been the first time we worked with someone outside of our business that quickly grasped our vision, and that I could completely forget about and would still deliver above expectations.
I honestly can't wait to work in many more projects together!
![The ‘Giveaway Piggy Back Scam’ In Full Swing [2022]](https://www.cjco.com.au/wp-content/uploads/pexels-nataliya-vaitkevich-7172791-1-scaled-2-683x1024.jpg)
Disclaimer
*The information this blog provides is for general informational purposes only and is not intended as financial or professional advice. The information may not reflect current developments and may be changed or updated without notice. Any opinions expressed on this blog are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the views of the author’s employer or any other organization. You should not act or rely on any information contained in this blog without first seeking the advice of a professional. No representation or warranty, express or implied, is made as to the accuracy or completeness of the information contained in this blog. The author and affiliated parties assume no liability for any errors or omissions.
