Human remixes pay creatives, AI just pays shareholders
This article explores the ethical and economic implications of generative AI on creative labor. It argues that current AI models exploit human-created data without providing fair compensation to the original creators.
Why it matters
It addresses the growing tension between technological advancement and the protection of intellectual property rights for human workers in creative industries.
by Rashika Bahl and Joshua Rose, University of Melbourne
edited by Swati Mestri , reviewed by Andrew Zinin
This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:
Add as preferred source Credit: Merlin Lightpainting from Pexels Generative AI is built on the work of humans, but these creatives are rarely paid. If we don't protect them now, entire categories of labor risk being obliterated.
We've all seen the headlines about how generative artificial intelligence (AI) is shaping the future of work, and just last week, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announced a new national plan for AI.
But we're also hearing that young people entering the job market are pessimistic about the potential threat it poses to their futures.
Get smarter about the news
Sign up free for a feed built around what you actually care about, Dive Deeper research on any story, and the full text of every article.
Create free accountAlready have an account? Sign in