How AI Theft is Killing Free Speech

AI Theft. Many have assumed it's been taking place for some time. But now we have proof. What effect will it have on our ability to learn about and debate the world around us?

Written, directed and presented by Tom Nicholas.
Edited by Georgia Burrows.

*Chapters*
00:00 AI Theft is Taking Over
01:36 An AI Company Stole My Work
08:50 How the Internet Changed the News
17:27 The AI News Revolution
26:11 The Death of Independent Media?
28:27 Boomers Update!

*Bibliography*

*Blurb*

I recently discovered that 18 of my videos had been stolen to train the AI models of a handful of big tech companies including Anthropic, Apple and Nvidia. Obviously, this was mildly annoying

A lot has been said about the moral and legal repercussions of such Ai data scraping. But, I wanted to explore the potential impact it might have on our political and cultural discourse and debate.

How will a world in which any form of journalistic, political, or critical expression can be sucked up by an AI model and repurposed effect the basic economics of our media sphere?

Select footage courtesy of Getty
Music from Epidemic Sound

[ZappyOh]

1) Climb the ladder.
2) Remove the ladder.
3) Profit.

[anonharingenamn]

AI companies "protecting" copyright of big corporations while their entire data model is itself stolen is pretty hilarious. Or depressing, your choice I guess.

[FeronTheRaccon]

The only way to solve this is to feed Nintendo IPs into the AI and let Nintendo fight them over copyright lol

[shApYT]

It is piracy when we do it, but it isn't when they do it. Rules for thee, not for me.

[brulsmurf]

AI even read my masters thesis. A piece of text maybe 3 people ever fully read.

[littlestghost]

AI can't exist when the Internet Archive can't.

[Tamajyn]

If you go on google, download a few hundred copyrighted images, and they display them on your website for commercial gain, you'll get hit with a barrage of copyright infringements, and rightfully so.

If you download millions of copyrighted images, but instead use them to train an AI for commercial gain, as of yet apparently that's ok.

[brenatevi]

Someone tried to argue that AI was going to make creators more powerful. My reply was that isn't how companies were going to use AI: do everything they can do to cut as many people as they can out of their profits.

[videoboy]

It’s like how react streamers steal content, but now it’s big companies with AI.

[RandomDeforge]

Ads based Capitalist economy will be Democracy's undoing.

[Alex-cwrz]

The fact that they were trying to hide what they had done shows that they know what they are doing is wrong and illegal.

[Alex-cwrz]

I do think Gemini does show how pointless the AI we have now is. It will give you answer that is exactly the same as you would get if you scroll down past the gemini bit and even then it gets it wrong often times. They've put what $200 million into something that they can already do.

[andrewcole]

As someone who types in the URL to the times and economist, I'm feeling a bit attacked here lol

[lyrajaded]

As an artist, one thing I find extremely frustrating about generative ai is when I can recognize an artist peaking out through the soup. But because generative ai are entirely new images, it is impossible to reverse image search to find an artist! If we could reference the images one piece of ai referenced, I’m certain we could see just how closely ai copies certain works of art.

That being said, I imagine it is something similar with generative text. Reading something you enjoy, the tone, the pacing, the voice behind it. Wanting to read more by them, but then finding it extremely difficult to find that voice again.

It’s stealing people’s individuality and profiting off of it

[thomasslone]

and they always told me i was breaking the law when i saved Netflix streams and downloaded cracked adobe software

[danny]

They’re training generative intelligence on Enron emails?

[BewareTheLilyOfTheValley]

It may seem like a small thing but I'm very happy you pointed out the difference between a YouTube commentator of news and actual journalists who are breaking the news. I get so sick and tired of hearing people complaining about mainstream media and saying that social media is the only place they feel confident getting their news when they fail to realize that FEW of those social media posters are ever actually breaking the news. They're regurgitating what actual journalists have written. As you said, being a journalist takes so much more work and money. YouTubers can safely remain in their offices while someone doing a piece on a war risks being hurt, killed or even taken hostage.

People don't have to love the way media is presented these days but I think we all need to take a brief moment the next time we're about to rally about mainstream media and be grateful to the journalists who put in the legwork that social media commentators largely have not. I just don't see enough of that distinction being made.

[yellowmonkee]

Soon there will be so much AI garbage published that the machine will start feeding itself and producing ever better garbage.
And some day, a major part of the internet is going to be pure gibberish.

[Stephen...]

I think almost every source in The Pile was heavily threatened by IP law at one point. People had to fight tooth an nail for their fair use rights only for a lot of those same IP holders who were previously threatening them to turn around and gobble it all up, somehow avoiding the copyright of small creators. Must be nice to own everything and make all the rules...

[Janokins]

intermediaries? They sound like the bourgeoisie to me (in the traditional sense that they don't provide the thing, they just own the thing that hosts it)