A good place to start this weekend is with a Sonnet created through Tim Jore's imaginative prompts in GenAI, asking it to present a perspective on the subject in Shakespearean English. This was one of the slides in the MAI 2025 breakout, “The Messy Collision of Copyright Law and Generative AI.” Of course, since it originates from the brains(?) of GenAI, it can’t hold a copyright. Great work, Tim!
A Sonnet on the Tumult of Al and Copyright
When minds of men did teach machines to dream,
With lines and forms from art's vast, hallowed chest,
They stirred the law from slumber's gentle seam,
For who owns thought when thought is Al-pressed?
The painter cries, "Thou thief of soul and brush!"
The coder claims, "It learns, yet doth not steal. "
But judges stall, amid the legal crush,
Unsure if minds of code may truly feel.
Lo! Commons seek to guard what all may share,
Yet statutes lag behind the lightning's pace.
The rights of authors float in thin-sliced air,
While models train on every song and face.
Still Congress hems and courts in quand'ry wait –
Can art be born from minds that imitate?
Thus stands the stage: a clash of ink and code,
Where rules are penned vet oft are overthrown.
The future limps along this thorny road,
With questions writ in stone-and yet unknown.
Calum Smyth
Mr. Smyth wrote an interesting article a couple of weeks ago on AI from an investor’s perspective that underscores some of the challenges faced by AI and GenAI. He is a lawyer with the Brussels-based Wiggin Law Firm and previously led the intellectual property function at Barclays Bank. Mr. Smyth is listed in IAM Strategy 300: The World’s Leading IP Strategists. The article, A.I. and the Law: Businesses and Investors Can No Longer Plead Ignorance, makes the point that, as a lawyer, advising clients on A.I. is uniquely perplexing. Perplexing – I like that word! One thing that is clear is that the scope of AI law in the UK, the EU, and elsewhere remains unclear. Three points in his conclusion bear reading.
The global uncertainty surrounding the legality of AI systems is unlikely to be resolved anytime soon.
The implications of AI and GenAI include IP law, politics, and technology. Mr. Smyth is correct. While we typically follow law and technology events, we often overlook the most unpredictable element: politics. Dismiss it to your own peril.
Businesses (and organizations) seeking investment would do well to be informed, proactively addressing risks head-on, while using legal foresight to their advantage.
The Authors Guild
The Guild’s post on "AI Licensing: What Authors Should Know" offers a unique perspective from an organization dedicated to helping authors maximize their copyrights. This post presents author’s viewpoints on the GenAI struggle (well, some authors anyway). Here are some key insights:
They suggest, “It is crucial that we move AI companies away from the current reliance on fair use to licensing.” They have identified the biggest challenge, the fair use defense. But is moving AI companies possible or realistic?
The Guild acknowledges that further development of AI and LLMs cannot be stopped, noting that hundreds of billions of dollars have already been invested in generative AI. Additionally, they note the U.S. government is working to ensure its leadership in AI development while other countries are trying to attract AI developers to their shores.
The post raises a point we often overlook. “Different authors have different interests when it comes to AI licensing, and we need to respect and support them all.” Remembering to respect others is important, even if our conclusions on AI and GenAI usage differ from those of others. “In everything, then, do to others as you would have them do to you. For this is the essence of the Law and the Prophets.” Mat 7:12 BSB
Have a blessed weekend!
Bruce Erickson