Latest news with #GPAIs
Euractiv
6 days ago
- Business
- Euractiv
As the AI Act falls short on protecting copyright, creatives eye licensing reform
Copyright holders are turning their attention towards a potential licensing framework, after being left disappointed by the AI Act's transparency obligations and Code of Practice for general-purpose AIs (GPAIs). The Commission released Thursday much-anticipated template for AI developers to summarise the data used to train their models. However, the measure has been met with scepticism from creators, who believe that transparency alone is not enough to safeguard their copyrights. By nature, GPAI models – the technology that underpins the likes of ChatGPT, Le Chat, or Midjourney – require vast amounts of data to produce outputs that are more accurate and less likely to be biased. But the provenance of the data is often opaque, and creatives and artists worry that they have no way of knowing whether their work was used to train AI systems – and therefore no way to object to its use. Transparency as a first step The EU's landmark Artificial Intelligence Act is intended to bring greater transparency to AI systems and enable creators to assert their copyright claims. The law requires developers of GPAI models to produce summaries of the data used for training, and to implement systems allowing right holders to "opt out" of having their content used for model development. On Thursday, the Commission published the template it expects AI developers to use for these summaries of training data. This aspect of the AI Act faced intense lobbying by copyright holders, who wanted the templates to be as granular as possible, and AI companies, who worried too much detail could reveal trade secrets. But industry is not convinced by the Commission's implementation. "It falls short of safeguarding the creative sector and, if not corrected, risks undermining Europe's AI Act and copyright framework in favour of a few global tech companies," Burak Özgen, deputy general manager of GESAC, the authors and composers' lobby, told Euractiv. A Code of Practice for GPAIs was also negotiated between experts, lobbyists and civil society over several months to further flesh out compliance around key issues such as copyright. But for rights holders, the final text also fell short. The improvements in the final version of the Code are " certainly insufficient", said Özgen, arguing that it lacks "concrete" detail which would make it "actionable". His blunt summary is that the Code does "nothing useful to help exercising and enforcing the rights of authors". Copyright rules fit for GenAI At the core of the disagreement between right holders and AI developers is how copyright rules apply to generative AI tools – and what should come next. The EU's Copyright Directive allows the use of software that crawls the internet, on lawfully accessed websites and databases, to collect copyrighted text and images for data analytics or research – aka text and data mining (TDM) – unless copyright holders have actively opted out of having their work scraped. For the tech lobby CCIA, the TDM exception is essential to support AI innovation. The rules were " carefully designed to strike a vital balance between fostering innovation and protecting intellectual property," CCIA Europe's Senior Policy Manager, Boniface de Champris, told Euractiv. However, a study ordered by the Parliament's legal affairs committee takes a very different view, finding that the TDM rules were not intended for generative AI – and "do not provide legal certainty, transparency, or effective rights control", as the report puts it. The two camps remain divided over this issue, which may be why right holders are now turning their attention towards a potential dedicated framework for licensing agreements. Finding a way to be appropriately compensated for use of their works to train AI remains a central concern for them, especially as GenAI uptake accelerates. A draft Parliament report led by MEP Axel Voss – who also negotiated the EU's existing Copyright Directive – makes the case for a new framework to enable licensing deals to be concluded. The report must still be amended by other MEPs before it can represent the Parliament's official position. But the composer and songwriters lobby ECSA was happy that Voss' draft report " rejects the application of the TDM exceptions to Generative AI, and calls to ensure fair remuneration," as Helienne Lindvall, its president, told Euractiv. The ball is now in the Commission's court. It must decide whether to respond to the rise of GenAI by revising the EU's copyright framework – with the Copyright Directive up for review in 2026 – and, if so, figure out how to ensure that any new rules strike the right balance between support for AI innovation and protecting human creativity. (nl, aw)
Euractiv
7 days ago
- Business
- Euractiv
Commission publishes GenAI transparency tool days before rules kick in
On Thursday, the Commission published templates for AI companies to summarise the data they used to train their models – days before transparency rules for generative AI tools start to apply. The AI Act's rules for General Purpose AI models (GPAIs) – such as OpenAI's ChatGPT, MidJourney or Mistral's Le Chat – come into force on 2 August, applying legally binding transparency obligations on AI developers. Training data summaries that will be produced when AI developers fill in the templates are a key component of the law's push for transparency, as they will require GPAI makers to publicly disclose how their AI models are made – specifying which data went into building their systems. The Commission's AI training data template has been eagerly awaited by creative industries, which hope the transparency tool will help them enforce copyright claims against GPAIs. Under the template released today, AI providers will have to disclose the main datasets they used to train models. They also need to provide a narrative description of data that was scraped from the internet and any other sources of data. A Commission description of the template said the tool aims to strike a balance between enabling detailed enough disclosure to ensure effective transparency, while also allowing GPAI makers to protect commercially sensitive information. Ahead of entry into force of the AI Act's rules for GPAIs on 2 August, the Commission has been expected to publish several documents to support compliance. The template was the last item on the Commission's to-do list – after guidelines and a GPAI Code of Practice were published earlier this month. In recent weeks – with time running out before the legal deadline kicks in for GPAIs – industry had been pushing for the Commission to delay implementation. However, the Commission made it clear, multiple times, that the 2 August date stands. While the GPAI rules become applicable next week, the AI Office, which is the body in charge of enforcing the law, will not do so until August 2026 – giving the AI companies one more year before they could be fined for any breaches. Models that are already on the market have until August 2027 to abide by the rules. (nl)
Euractiv
18-07-2025
- Business
- Euractiv
Meta won't sign EU's Code of Practice for generative AI
Meta is the first large company to announce that it will not sign the EU's Code of Practice for general purpose AIs (GPAIs) – a voluntary set of commitments that's supposed to support AI developers' compliance with the legally binding AI Act. Meta's chief global affairs officer, Joel Kaplan, revealed the decision to eschew the GPAI Code in a post on LinkedIn – writing: 'Europe is heading down the wrong path on AI." 'This Code introduces a number of legal uncertainties for model developers, as well as measures which go far beyond the scope of the AI Act,' he also argued. The AI Act has faced a storm of criticism in the past few months as many companies have called on the Commission to delay or even rework it. The GPAI Code was at the centre of this discussion as its publication was repeatedly delayed. The Commission released the final version on July 10. So far, France's Mistral AI and ChatGPT-maker OpenAI have announced they will sign the Code. Responding to Meta's move, MEP Sergey Lagodinsky, Green co-rapporteur for the AI Act, pointed to Mistral and OpenAI both signing and said the final text had been written with GPAI providers in mind. 'I don't buy Meta's claim that the Code exceeds the AI Act,' he told Euractiv. This is a developing story... refresh for updates. (nl)
Euractiv
18-07-2025
- Business
- Euractiv
Commission releases AI Act guidelines for general purpose AI models
On Friday the Commission published guidelines for general-purpose AI (GPAI) models under the AI Act. The AI Act puts legal obligations on providers of GPAI models, such as the large language models powering generative AI chatbots like OpenAI's ChatGPT. The document released today tackles key compliance questions for GPAIs. For example, the document defines which models count as general purpose and which companies are considered a 'provider'. The Commission also says that companies which only modify existing models are exempt from the GPAI provider rules as long as they used less than a third of the compute power that was used to train the base model. This will mean many European companies will also be exempt from having to comply with the rules for GPAI providers – since they primarily rely on modifying models trained by foreign providers. Further carve-outs exist for open source models, which the Commission guidelines more clearly define. The AI Act's rules for GPAI models start applying on August 2, although the Commission will only start enforcing them a year afterwards. AI models already on the market – such as OpenAI's most recent GPT-4o – will only have to comply another year after that, in 2027. Delays to the Commission producing compliance guidance for the AI Act have contributed to calls by industry for a pause on enforcing the law. The Commission's GPAI guidelines should not be confused with the Code of Practice for GPAIs – a voluntary set of commitments drawn up by a range of stakeholders that AI developers can sign up to as a compliance aid. The GPAI Code was also finalised earlier this month. The guidelines now outline what happens if providers sign up to the code – or not. (nl)
