1 Comment

  1. alina_valyaeva on

    Submission Statement:

    * Anticipated court decisions (The New York Times vs. OpenAI, Getty Images vs. Stability AI, and others) have the potential to shape the regulatory framework for AI-generated content and the operational strategies of AI companies.
    * The latter are already more carefully assessing the risks of using scraped content and obtaining proper licenses, as evidenced by recent cases in which AI companies have partnered with content providers (BRIA x Getty Images, OpenAI x Axel Springer, OpenAI x Le Monde, Apple x Shutterstock, Reddit x an unnamed company, and many more).
    * This shift towards licensing content for training purposes may lead to the emergence of a dataset market for AI training. The dataset market is projected to reach $7.23 billion by 2030, growing at a CAGR of 20.8% from 2022 to 2030. Historically, specific datasets — particularly those for industries like healthcare and manufacturing, which require data that is not easily collected from public domains — have dominated the market. However, with the growing need for licensed content to train GenAI algorithms, such datasets are expected to become an integral part of this expanding market.
    * As the regulatory environment evolves, the landscape for creators could shift with more clarity around opt-out and the emergence of additional copyright protection mechanisms, such as data poisoning.
    * Trust and transparency are emerging as key values. This is particularly evident in industries like newsrooms and documentary production, where accuracy and integrity of content are paramount.

    How do you see these trends evolving? Do you think the GenAI industry will eventually move out of the gray area and become more regulated and transparent? Will the aforementioned lawsuits play a significant role in this process? Will this lead us to having some industry standards and best practices in place?

Leave A Reply