The Productiveness Fee is analyzing whether or not expertise corporations must be exempted from copyright guidelines that cease corporations from mining textual content and knowledge to coach synthetic intelligence fashions.
The PC, in its interim report into “harnessing data and the digital economy”, used copyright as a case examine for a way Australia’s present regulatory framework might be tailored to handle the dangers of synthetic intelligence.
A key advice from the interim report was that the federal authorities ought to conduct a sweeping evaluation of rules to plug potential gaps that might be exploited by “bad actors” utilizing AI.
Scott Farquhar, the co-founder of software program firm Atlassian, final week known as for an “urgent” overhaul of Australia’s copyright guidelines, arguing they have been out of step with different comparable nations.
Farquhar stated creating exemptions for textual content and knowledge mining to coach massive language fashions “could unlock billions of dollars of foreign investment into Australia”.
That suggestion has been rejected by the Copyright Company, a not-for-profit organisation that collects and distributes royalties to 1000’s of copyright holders. The company has argued as an alternative for the federal government to create a brand new compensation scheme for creators of content material utilized by tech corporations to coach their AI fashions.
Enroll: AU Breaking Information e mail
Stephen King, considered one of two commissioners main the PC’s inquiry into harnessing the alternatives of the digital economic system, stated: “Copyright is a great example of where Australia needs to sit back and ask: ‘Are our laws fit for purpose with AI?’”
“The obvious harm is that an AI company may use copyright materials without providing appropriate compensation. On the other side, we want the development of AI-specific tools that use that copyrighted material,” King stated.
“It may be possible to say, can we approach AI the same way we have approached copyright in other ways, through copyright collections. Music is played everywhere, so we have set up collecting societies that are authorised under our competition laws, and they act on behalf of singers, songwriters and creators.”
King stated the PC was asking for suggestions on different choices, earlier than a remaining advice by the top of the 12 months.
“We have a fair dealing exemption that doesn’t include text and data mining, maybe that should be an exemption – as long as AI companies are gaining legal copies and they have paid for it.”
In its third of 5 thematic experiences, the fee stated synthetic intelligence might resuscitate Australia’s moribund productiveness.
PC modelling confirmed that even essentially the most conservative estimate was that AI would ship a $116bn increase to the economic system over the subsequent decade.
King stated that this translated right into a $4,300 kicker to the common Australian’s actual wage in 10 years’ time, and that the precise advantages might be a lot bigger.
The fee suggested in opposition to creating an overarching AI-specific piece of laws, and warned that clumsy or extreme regulation risked stifling the expertise’s probably transformative advantages.
That message is prone to be properly obtained by the federal government, with Andrew Leigh, the assistant minister for productiveness, backing this strategy.
However King stated the fee was not arguing for a minimalist strategy to AI regulation.
“It’s not light-touch at all. What we are saying is that AI is going to make it easier, cheaper and faster for bad actors to engage in harmful conduct. But most of that harmful conduct is already illegal,” he stated.
“Let’s work out where the harms are and see whether they are covered by existing law. And if they are, let’s make sure the regulators have the resources and powers to stop the bad actors.”
The PC’s interim report additionally backed altering privateness guidelines to include an outcomes-based strategy, reasonably than a “box-ticking” train the place companies “comply with the letter of the law but not the spirit of it”.
The fee stated the federal government “should support new pathways to allow individuals and businesses to access and share data that relates to them”.
