Go online and ask AI — the abbreviation for artificial intelligence — this question: “What is theft of copyrighted newspaper material?”
The answer is thorough.
“Theft of copyrighted newspaper material, legally termed copyright infringement, is the unauthorized reproduction, distribution or public display of a publication’s protected works. Under U.S. copyright law, this occurs when someone copies or republishes articles, photographs, or graphics without permission from the original publisher.”
American Opinion logo
Forum News Service
The AI robot continues: “Newspaper content theft typically happens through digital scraping … plagiarism … and unauthorized reproduction.”
The irony is thick. Whereas AI is smart enough to be able to explain the specifics behind copyright infringement, it does not mention its own theft of content.
Hopefully, a lawsuit filed this month by hundreds of newspapers nationwide will rein in what has become AI’s rampant theft of protected content.
According to a report from the New Jersey Globe, the lawsuit was filed against OpenAI and Microsoft, alleging that the tech companies are using copyrighted material to train and develop commercial AI products. They’re doing it without compensation or permission.
As reported by the Globe, they’re doing it by appropriating “original news content to build their AI systems,” which the suit claims violates the Copyright Act and is “threatening the future of local journalism.”
One thing to remember: Anyone who takes newspaper content without paying for it and without seeking permission is actually stealing. Those folks who copy and paste entire stories onto their Facebook page or some other website are indeed stealing.
Is it worth the newspaper pursuing legal action? Probably not, and the perpetrators know it.
Would they be as smug and transparent if they stole a pack of gum? Would they publicize the theft? And wouldn’t the general population look down on them if they did?
Yet it happens — often.
There is an allowance called “fair use.” That’s essentially what lets people and entities — newspapers, for instance — use limited portions of copyrighted material without permission, albeit for specific purposes.
Fair use allows quoting excerpts for the purpose of commentary, reviews, teaching or compiling separate news reports. An example is this article itself — through fair use, we have taken portions of the New Jersey Globe’s report about the newspapers’ lawsuit against AI. And even a portion of AI’s answer when we asked it about copyright theft.
Using a portion of a single story to help make a point is one thing. Ingesting millions of copyrighted works and then using the results to build massive blocks of information — and monetizing that information, to the detriment of the original creators — is another thing altogether.
The courts likely will consider whether AI’s use of the copyrighted material is “transformative,” or whether it adds new meaning. They also likely will consider the “effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.” Both factors are noted in wording of the U.S. Copyright Act. The former may be debatable, but the latter seems obvious.
It’s good to see the newspapers band together against AI’s tactic. Newspapers do often employ fair use, but it’s limited because our business model is to create new and original content.
AI’s business model, however, seems rather simple: Steal content and monetize it.
This American Opinion editorial is the view of the Grand Forks Herald Editorial Board. Send feedback to:
Herald editorials are written under the byline “Herald editorial board,” since they sometimes include the thoughts, opinions or written input of multiple authors. Editorials generally reflect the opinion of a newspaper’s publisher.