Some gen AI vendors say they'll defend customers from IP lawsuits. Others, not so much (must-read)

[highplainsdem]

This is a must-read if you use generative AI, text or image generators, since you need to know how much you'll be liable for IP lawsuits from that use.


https://techcrunch.com/2023/10/06/some-gen-ai-vendors-say-theyll-defend-customers-from-ip-lawsuits-others-not-so-much/

-snip-
Perhaps it’s no surprise, then, that in a recent survey of Fortune 500 companies by Acrolinx, nearly a third said that intellectual property was their biggest concern about the use of generative AI.

The threat of running afoul of copyright with a generative AI tool hasn’t stopped investors from pouring billions into the startups creating those tools. One wonders, however, whether the situation will remain tenable for much longer.

A question of indemnity
In the midst of the uncertainty, you might think that generative AI vendors would stand behind their customers in the strongest terms — if for no other reason than to their allay their fears of IP-related legal challenges.

But you’d be wrong.

-snip-

You should read the entire article to find out which AI companies are willing to do what about the copyright violations that their products are likely to create, with no help from the user, and without the user's knowledge since these companies almost all are keeping mum about what stolen intellectual property is in their data sets, which are the subject of a lot of lawsuits already.

Anthropic, which partners with Amazon and Google, reserves the right to hold itself harmless in lawsuits resulting from use of its products, and the company refused to say if it would ever legally or financially support a customer hit with a copyright lawsuit.

A21 Labs wouldn't answer TechCrunch, either, though its published policy says that while it might be willing to assume control of a legal defense of a customer facing a copyright lawsuit, the customer will have to pay A21 for the legal defense.

OpenAI, of ChatGPT infamy, says in its policy that its liability for copyright violations will be limited to "the amount [a customer] paid for [an OpenAI] service that gave rise to [a] claim during the 12 months before the the liability arose or $100." Wow, a whole hundred dollars to help out, maybe...

Stablity AI, Midjourney and Runway all leave the customer solely liable for any copyright lawsuit.

Amazon will defend some of the paying customers of some of its AI products.

IBM will also offer IP indemnity for some customers paying for its AI products.

Google might defend customers paying to use its AI products, but will probably stop those customers from using them (apparently even if the customer had no idea the AI had violated copyright).

Microsoft will indemnify some users of paid versions of some of its AI products. But before it does that it will first decide whether the customer used guardrails and content filters properly, which is a planet-size loophole.

Adobe, Shutterstock and Getty Images offer to indemnify customers paying for their AI, but that's because they are using legal data sets they have a right to use, so there's little risk of lawsuits.

But with all the AI companies that stole much of what's in their data sets - which is most of them - you're basically on your own if their AI violates copyright when you're using it.

[Think. Again.]

1. I don't know.....

...having a company that I buy something from say they're willing to defend me in a lawsuit from their product isn't really much of a selling point for me.

[highplainsdem]

2. It would be best not to have to worry about an IP lawsuit in the first place over what a machine

churns out from data sets you know little or nothing about.

Best not to use generative AI, IMO. But these companies have invested billions in their AI models, which are incredibly expensive to operate in terms of both money and environmental costs, and they want to see profits, so they are desperate for customers.

[MorbidButterflyTat]

3. +1