Are the Image Rights Trolls Unhappy?
March 21, 2023
Imagine the money. Art aggregators like Getty Images, Alamy, and others suck up images from old books, open source repositories, and probably from kindergarteners. Then when some blog boob uses an image, the image rights trolls leap into action. Threatening letters flood the “infringers” and a reminder than money must be paid. Who authorizes this? The law and the publishers who tell the “enforcer”, “Sure, get some money and will split it with you.” A great business indeed. Many “pigeons” are defeathered.
But there is a road block which some image rights trolls will endeavor to remove. “AI-Generated Images from Text Can’t Be Copyrighted, US Government Rules” states:
Any images that are produced by giving a text prompt to current generative AI models, such as Midjourney or Stable Diffusion, cannot be copyrighted in the US. That’s according to the US Copyright Office (USCO), which has equated such prompts to a buyer giving directions to a commissioned artist.
There is hope. The article points out:
The US Copyright Office left open the door for protecting works with AI-generated elements.
I can hear the sighs of relief from Mr. Pigeon’s office in London to the professionals exhaling at the Higbee law firm. Hope lives! The article adds:
However, the office has left the door open to granting copyright protections to work with AI-generated elements. “The answer will depend on the circumstances, particularly how the AI tool operates and how it was used to create the final work,” it said. “This is necessarily a case-by-case inquiry. If a work’s traditional elements of authorship were produced by a machine, the work lacks human authorship and the Office will not register it.” Last month, the USCO determined that images generated by Midjourney and used in a graphic novel were not copyrightable. However, it said the text and layout of Kris Kashtanova’s Zarya of the Dawn could be afforded copyright protection.
Will blog boobs who use machine generated images be able to illustrate their war veteran blogs, the church bulletins, and the individuals who wanted to celebrate flower arranging be free to create with smart software?
Maybe. I have confidence that legal eagles in the image trolling game will find a way. Where there is money to be had, creativity blooms. (Sorry flower person.)
Stephen E Arnold, March 21, 2023
Rights Issues: How Can Money Be Extracted from Content?
March 20, 2023
I don’t have a dog in this fight. I gave up on “real” publishers when the outfits with which I was working in Sweden and the UK went to the big printing press in the multiverse. Yep, failure. I am mindful about image rights too, but that doesn’t mean my Craiyon.com images or the clip art I have in my files from the years of CD-ROMs with illustrations that were “free to use.” Ho ho ho on that marketing blather.
I want to call attention to two news items and then offer a comment or two not presented by other dinobabies watching the wide, wild, wonderful world of digital information.
The first item is the Italian government’s conclusion that the illustration by Leonardo d Vinci is not in the public domain. I used to have a T shirt I bought in Florence with the image on the overpriced, made-in-China garment. I wonder if that shop on the bridge near the secret passage some big wheel used in the 16th century? I would assume that the Italian government has hoovered these and converted them to recycling fodder. You can read about this in the article “Italy Decides That Leonardo da Vinci’s 500 Year Old Works Are Not In The Public Domain.” The subtitle of the write up is “from the locking-up-in-the-public-domain department.” The story reports:
According to the Italian Cultural Heritage Code and relevant case law, faithful digital reproductions of works of cultural heritage — including works in the Public Domain — can only be used for commercial purposes against authorization and payment of a fee. Importantly though, the decision to require authorization and claim payment is left to the discretion of each cultural institution (see articles 107 and 108). In practice, this means that cultural institutions have the option to allow users to reproduce and reuse faithful digital reproductions of Public Domain works for free, including for commercial uses. This flexibility is fundamental for institutions to support open access to cultural heritage.
The operative word is “fee.”
The second item is about Internet Archive, a controversial outfit from the point of view of some publishers. The idea is that Internet Archive offers electronic books for free. Free, not fee, is an important concept. Publishers, writers, agents, book cover artists, and probably a French bulldog or two want to get a piece of the money generated by charging for electronic books. Look Amazon does it, and publishers are not thrilled. But there is some money paid out which is going the right direction.
The report I read is “The Internet Archive Is a Library.” Libraries and publishers have a long history. On one hand, publishers love to sell books to libraries. On the other hand, libraries are not turning cartwheels because libraries loan eBooks and other digital artifacts to patrons. As long as the money streams flow, publishers and rights holders are semi-happy, a bit like a black sheep of the family getting a few bucks when Uncle Tom goes to the big printing shop in the sky where my defunct publishers hopefully work setting type by hand.
The article says:
Despite its incredible library collections, which serve the needs of millions of people, Hachette Book Group, HarperCollins Publishers, John Wiley & Sons Inc., and Penguin Random House assert that the Internet Archive is not a real library.
If one is not a real library, that institution must pay for books. That seems clear to the publishers. I have wondered why the US Library of Congress was not moving in the same direction as the Internet Archive. Oh, well. What about the Special Library Association? Yeah, oh, well. And the American Library Association in concert with Harvard or Stanford? Oh, well.
So the Internet Archive is in jeopardy.
Several observations:
- Entities which could have assumed this job in concern with Internet Archive could have been more proactive. They weren’t, so here we are.
- Publishers are hungry for revenue, almost any type of revenue stream will do. Why not extract money from an outfit trying to perform a useful library-type function? Sorry, we want money and people can buy information from us summarizes the position of some publishers on earth and possibly in the big printing facility amidst the stars.
- Legal eagles love books. Plus those folks sometimes buy books to decorate their offices in the event a meeting is required in a suitably classy environment. Do lawyers read these books? Maybe, but I think professional publishers sell online content to them. Thus, in today’s world it makes sense for lawyers to determine what is a library and what is not, what content is free and which is not. I think I understand, but I am not going to call my attorney because I have to pay in 15 minute increments.
Net net: Libraries are for many negative spaces. Some books present information which is bad; therefore, ban or burn the books. Now we can defund regular libraries and shut down the online outfits. Publishers may be thrilled. Others may not care. I like libraries, but dinobabies don’t have influence. I am glad I am old.
Stephen E Arnold, March 20, 2023
Amazon Sells What Sells: Magazines and Newspapers Apparently Do Not Sell Well
March 17, 2023
I read “Amazon Will Discontinue Newspaper and Magazine Subscriptions in September.” The write up reports that Amazon is “abandoning the Kindle for Periodicals … [a] the Kindle Newsstand.” But that’s not all:
Amazon is trying to convince publishers to submit their newspapers and magazines to Prime Reading or Kindle Unlimited, but it remains to be seen if this will happen.
My understanding is that publishers have to give up more content and get less money. The idea is not particularly new. In the early days of the full text online commercial databases, money went into a pool and the money was distributed based on the full text online prints. If a publisher’s content attracted no online prints of the full text, zero money for that publisher.
Also, the early days of selling subscriptions online experienced some user pushback. The reason was that magazine readers wanted a fungible copy. Times change. Now no one wants fragments of dead trees in their in box. (Remember the good old days when publishers of some magazines would give away current copies of their publications to those boarding the Eastern Airlines shuttles from New York to Boston and New to DC and the reverse trips.)
Magazines were a good business once. Now magazines and newspapers are a tough sell. Even new angles like the Monocle outfit are into conferences, swag, and audio programs in an effort to woo subscribers and keep the 20,000 or so the company has amassed.
What’s the Amazon decision suggest to me? Here are my reactions this rainy morning in rural Kentucky:
- How are the other magazine and newspaper resellers doing? Apple, Scribd, Zinio, and a few others are in the game and provide some options, maybe not attractive, but options nevertheless.
- Will the Monocle model or variations of it become the model for revenue best practices? The New York Times dabbles in swag, podcasts, and moving beyond news into what I call MBA type reports. I used to subscribe to the dead tree edition, but the home delivery was so terrible I cancelled. The online version stories in which I am interested is endlessly recycled in blogs and Twitter statements, I am okay with the crazy Lady ruining my breakfast with non-delivery.
- With many people struggling to figure out what information online is accurate and what is quasi-accurate, or what is weaponized, I think some knowledge problems await. Newspapers, like the one for which I worked, were organizations which had editorial policies, some guidelines, quite a few people who tried to deliver timely, accurate, informative news and reports.
Net net: Amazon can sell cheap stuff like Temu.com. The company does not seem to have the magic touch when it comes to magazines and newspapers. Remarkable but not surprising. The cloud of unknowing is expanding.
Stephen E Arnold, March 17. 2023
The Gray Lady: Calling the Winner of the AI Race
March 17, 2023
Editor’s Note: Written by a genuine dinobaby with some editorial inputs from Stephen E Arnold’s tech elves.
I love it when “real journalists” predict winners. Does anyone remember the Dewey thing? No, that’s okay. I read “How Siri, Alexa and Google Assistant Lost the AI Race.” The title reminds me of English 101 “How to” essays. (A publisher once told me that “how to” books were the most popular non fiction book type. Today the TikTok video may do the trick.)
The write up makes a case for OpenAI and ChatGPT winning the smart software race. Here’s a quote I circled:
The excitement around chatbots illustrates how Siri, Alexa and other voice assistants — which once elicited similar enthusiasm — have squandered their lead in the A.I. race.
Squandering a lead is not exactly losing a race, at least here in Kentucky. Races can be subject to skepticism, but in the races I have watched, a horse wins, gets a ribbon, the owner receives hugs and handshakes, and publicity. Yep, publicity. Good stuff.
The write up reports or opines:
Many of the big tech companies are now racing to come up with responses to ChatGPT.
Is this me-too innovation? My thought is that the article is not a how-to; it’s an editorial opinion.
My reaction to the story is that the “winner” is the use of OpenAI type technology with a dialogue-type interface. The companies criticized for squandering a lead are not dead in their stable stall. Furthermore, smart software is not new. The methods have been known for years. What’s new is that computational resources are more readily available. Content is available without briar patches like negotiating permissions and licenses to recycle someone else’s data. Code libraries are available. Engineers and programmers are interested in doing something with the AI Lego blocks. People with money want to jump on the high speed train even if the reliability and the destination are not yet known.
I would suggest that the Gray Lady’s analysis is an somewhat skewed way to point out that some big tech outfits have bungled and stumbled.
The race, at least here in Harrod’s Creek, is not yet over. I am not sure the nags are out of their horse carriers yet. Why not criticize in the context of detailed, quite specific technical, financial, and tactical factors? I will answer my own question, “The Gray Lady has not gotten over how technology disrupted the era of big newspapers as gatekeepers.”
How quickly will the Gray Lady replace “real journalists” (often with agendas) with cheaper, faster software.
I will answer my own question, “Faster than some of the horses running in the Kentucky Derby this year.”
Stephen E Arnold, March 17, 2023
The Google: Is Thinking Clearly a Core Competency at the Company
March 16, 2023
Editor’s Note: This short write up is the work of a real, semi-alive dinobaby, not smart software.
The essay “The Nightmare of AI-Powered Gmail Has Arrived.” The main point of the article is that Google is busy putting smart software in a number of its services. I noted this paragraph:
Google is retrofitting its product line with AI. Last month, it demonstrated its take on a chatty version of its search engine. Yesterday, it shared more details about AI-assisted Gmail and Google Docs. In Gmail, there are tools that will attempt to compose entire emails or edit them for tone as well as tools for ingesting and summarizing long threads.
Nope. Not interested.
The image of three managers with their hair on fire was generated by https://scribblediffusion.com/. My hunch is that a copyright troll will claim the image as their clients’ original work. I sticking with the smart software as the artist.
I underlined this statement as well:
Most interesting are the ways in which these features seem to be in conflict with one another.
What’s up?
- A Code Red at Google and suggestions from senior management to get in gear with smart software
- Big boy Microsoft continued to out market the Google (not too tough to do in my opinion)
- The ChatGPT juggernaut continued to operate like a large electro-magnet, pulling users from folks who has previously accrued significant experience with large language models.
The write up makes one point in my opinion. Google’s wizards are not able to think clearly. As the article concludes:
For example, in offices already burdened by inefficient communication and processes, it’s easy to see how reducing the cost of creating content might produce weird consequences and externalities. Tim can now send four times as many emails as he used to. Does he have four times as much to say?
Net net: Wow, the Google. The many and possibly overlapping smart services remind me of the outputs from a high school science club struggling to get as many Science Fair project done in the final days before the judging starts. Wow, the Google.
Stephen E Arnold, March 16, 2023
Ethical AI: Let Us Not Take Our Eye Off the Money Ball, Shall We?
March 15, 2023
What full-time job includes an automatic ejection seat?
Flying an F 35? Yes.
Working on ethical and responsible smart software? Yes. A super duper ejection module too.
I wonder if Google’s enabling of the stochastic parrot conference and the Dr. Timnit Gebru incident made an impression on Microsoft? Hmmm. I the information in “Microsoft Just Laid Off One of Its Responsible AI Teams” is accurate, Microsoft’s management has either [a] internalized the Google approach or [b] missed the memorandum describing downstream effects of deprecating “responsible AI.”
The image above was output by craiyon.com. True, one of the Beyond Search researchers added the evil red eye and the pile of cash. We think the evil eye and the money illustrate where ethical behavior ranks among the priorities of some senior executives.
The write up by two of the Land of Bank Crashes favorites reports:
Microsoft laid off its entire ethics and society team within the artificial intelligence organization as part of recent layoffs that affected 10,000 employees across the company … The move leaves Microsoft without a dedicated team to ensure its AI principles are closely tied to product design …
The article is about 1,500 words, and I suggest you work through the essay/news/chest thumper.
Several observations:
- The objective is control, not ethical control. Just control.
- Smart software knows how to string together words, not what the words connote.
- MBAs with incentive plans view ethics as an interesting concept but one with the appeal of calculating their bonuses on an Amiga computer.
Net net: What exactly is the news about a big tech company trimming its ethics professionals? I thought it was standard operating procedure.
PS. I admire the begging for sign up pleas as well. Classy for some “real news” write ups. Ejection seat activated.
Stephen E Arnold, March 15, 2023
Interesting Critique of the Google
March 14, 2023
I know there are other browsers available. For many people Google Chrome is THE browser. Microsoft figured out that Credge was cheaper and probably less likely to be zapped by the Google. Vivaldi is a browser working to attract users and provide a less money-centric software cocoon for online users. It too uses the Chromium engine.
I read “Vivaldi Co-Founder: Advertisers Stole the Internet from Us.” The article is mostly content marketing; nevertheless, I noted a handful of assertions and factoids I found thought provoking.
Here are a few. My observation about the comment appears in italics.
… part of the issue companies like Google may have is that Vivaldi blocks a lot of tracking and gets around advertisements in novel ways. No surprise I believe.
Android’s Privacy Sandbox can track users by creating an offline profile on them and show relevant advertisements based on that. No surprise I believe. Google dies without ad revenue.
… data can be used to influence how people vote, à la Cambridge Analytica. No surprise. Control the information, gain power.
the current state of advertising is less profitable for sites now than it was before widespread tracking was in place. No surprise but Google benefits because it “owns” the rights to charge people to enter and leave Club Ad via its swinging door.
The situation is clear: A small company faces a long slog up Mt. Everest without cold weather gear. Does the government of Nepal care? Nope.
Stephen E Arnold, March 14, 2023
If Google Is Online Advertising, Why Does Malvertising Thrive?
March 14, 2023
I think this question struck me after reading a few paragraphs of “Malvertising on Google Ads: It’s Hiding in Plain Site.” The essay is designed to cause a reader to embrace the commerce malware service provided by Kolide. How do I know? Here’s the statement that tipped me off:
Want to see how Kolide can get your entire fleet updated, patched and compliant? Watch Kolide’s on-demand demo today.
Despite the content marketing sway in the article, I noted an interesting comment about Google. After citing a Googley statement about the online ad giant’s good intentions and methods for dealing with malware, the write up says:
Unfortunately, the search engine does not provide a definition nor examples of what falls under “egregious violations.” And given how easy it is for bad actors to simply make a new account when a new one is shut down, this approach doesn’t meet the requirements for reliability or scalability. Still, when you look at things from Google’s perspective, these policies make sense.
In my opinion, Google happily delivers malvertising because Google sells advertising. The company does not want to harm its revenue. Just as the pop ads running on top of YouTube videos, Google is not losing revenue. The company says, “No more overlays in a few months.” Why? Is it because Google will introduce Amazon-Twitch style unskippable ads, insert more unskippable commercials in videos, and add more end-of-video ads? Absolutely. Google is not going to give up revenue in my opinion.
Shifting the responsibility for identifying and remediating issues with Google ad-delivered malware is good for cyber security companies and super good for Google. My view is that we have one more example of specious behavior from a company unable to get its ethical compass focused on any direction but its revenue.
Stephen E Arnold, March 13, 2023
The Confluence: Big Tech, Lobbyists, and the US Government
March 13, 2023
I read “Biden Admin’s Cloud Security Problem: It Could Take Down the Internet Like a Stack of Dominos.” I was thinking that the take down might be more like the collapses of outfits like Silicon Valley Bank.
I noted this statement about the US government, which is
embarking on the nation’s first comprehensive plan to regulate the security practices of cloud providers like Amazon, Microsoft, Google and Oracle, whose servers provide data storage and computing power for customers ranging from mom-and-pop businesses to the Pentagon and CIA.
Several observations:
- Lobbyists have worked to make it easy for cloud providers and big technology companies to generate revenue is an unregulated environment.
- Government officials have responded with inaction and spins through the revolving door. A regulator or elected official today becomes tomorrow’s technology decision maker and then back again.
- The companies themselves have figured out how to use their money and armies of attorneys to do what is best for the companies paying them.
What’s the consequence? Wonderful wordsmithing is one consequence. The problem is that now there are Mauna Loas burbling in different places.
Three of them are evident: The fragility of Silicon Valley approach to innovation. That’s reactive and imitative at this time. The second issue is the complexity of the three body problem resulting from lobbyists, government methods, and monopolistic behaviors. Commercial enterprises have become familiar with the practice of putting their thumbs on the scale. Who will notice?
What will happen? The possible answers are not comforting. Waving a magic wand and changing what are now institutional behaviors established over decades of handcrafting will be difficult.
I touch on a few of the consequences in an upcoming lecture for the attendees at the 2023 National Cyber Crime Conference.
Stephen E Arnold, March 13, 2023
Is Intelware Square Dancing in Israel?
March 10, 2023
It is a hoe down. Allemande Left. Do Si Do. Circle Left. Now Promenade. I can hear the tune in “NSO Group Co-Founder Emerges As New Majority Owner.” My toe was tapping when I read:
Omri Lavie – the “O” in NSO Group … appears to have emerged as the company’s new majority owner. Luxembourg filings show that Lavie’s investment firm, Dufresne Holding, is – for now – the sole owner of a Luxembourg-based holding company that ultimately owns NSO Group.
What’s the company’s technology enable? The Guardian says:
Pegasus can hack into any phone without leaving an obvious trace, enabling users to gain access to a person’s encrypted calls and chats, photographs, emails, and any other information held on a phone. It can also be used to turn a phone into a remote listening device by controlling its recorder.
Is the Guardian certain that this statement embraces the scope of the NSO Group’s capabilities? I don’t know. But the real newspaper sounds sure that it has its facts lined up.
Was the transition smooth? Well, there may have been some choppy water as the new owner boarded. The article reports:
[The] move follows in the wake of multiple legal fights between NSO and a US-based financial company that is now known as Treo, which controls the equity fund that owns a majority stake in NSO. A person familiar with the matter said Treo had been alerted to the change in ownership of the company’s shares in a recent letter by Lavie, which appears to have caught the financial group by surprise. The person said Treo was still trying to figure out the financial mechanism that Lavie had used to assume control of the shares, but that it believed the company’s financial lenders had, in effect, ceded control of the group to the Israeli founder.
I find it interesting when the milieu of intelligence professionals intersects with go-go money people. Is Treo surprised.
Allemande Right. Do Si Do. Promenade home.
Stephen E Arnold, March 10, 2023
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
