The Quebec publishing community is calling on the federal government to enforce the Copyright Act in order to dissuade artificial intelligence (AI) services from using works without the prior authorization of the authors. The worst mistake, according to the publishers, would be to open loopholes in current legislation in order to accommodate these companies.
“There are fears that the technology industry will ask for exceptions to the law so as not to be obliged to ask authors for permission to use their works to generate artificial intelligence. And above all so as not to have to pay them. This would have the effect of discouraging creation in the country. The government must resist this demand from the industry,” argues Mr.e Stéphanie Hénault, director of legal affairs at the National Association of Book Publishers (ANEL).
As part of a consultation organized by Ottawa on AI, ANEL submitted a brief in which it is mentioned that the current law does not need to be modified to take into account the arrival of generative artificial intelligence. On the contrary, the current guidelines already imply that AI software had to request the explicit authorization of rights holders before drawing inspiration from their works. Companies that produce new content using artificial intelligence cannot presume the consent of those who hold the rights to an original work.
“You should know that generative artificial intelligence is not created by magic. Algorithms draw inspiration from already existing works to create new ones,” explains Jonathan Roberge, a professor at the National Institute of Scientific Research (INRS) who has studied the subject extensively.
More transparency
That said, it is difficult to have guarantees that these platforms respect the law currently. In the United States, the New York Times filed a lawsuit in December against OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT, for using one of their paid content without the journal’s consent. To prevent this from happening here too, ANEL demands more transparency from the artificial intelligence giants.
“We are asking the government to force these companies to disclose the register of works they have used for content creation purposes. This is the best way to ensure that generative artificial intelligence continues to evolve within a legal framework. Additionally, users could know the sources of the systems they use. This would allow us to see if artificial intelligence is biased,” underlines M.e Hénault, from ANEL.
Well-founded fears
ANEL’s positions on artificial intelligence generation overlap those of other organizations in the cultural sector, such as the Union of Quebec Writers and the Coalition for the Diversity of Cultural Expressions.
“I find that their positions are very consistent. They are very wise. The cultural industry is absolutely right to be concerned that the federal government will change the law in favor of artificial intelligence giants,” notes Jonathan Roberge.
You should know that generative artificial intelligence is not created by magic. The algorithms draw inspiration from already existing works to create new ones.
Since the Ministry of Innovation, Science and Economic Development launched the consultation process in October, this INRS professor has observed that the federal government has a favorable bias towards artificial intelligence services.
The consultation ended on Monday. Will the law be revised? The federal government remains evasive for the moment. “Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada and Canadian Heritage will carefully review the comments received, and an update will be published on the consultation page in due course,” we simply let it be known.