A license option for no consent to AI training is needed #34
Replies: 3 comments 1 reply
-
|
I updated the title of this discussion to: "A license option for no consent to AI training is needed" For expressing opposition to CC signals, please see: |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
See #26 (reply in thread) and #23 (comment) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Thanks for this feedback. CC licenses are copyright licenses, so anything that is permitted by copyright law falls outside the scope of them. It varies under applicable law, but the use of copyrighted works for AI training often falls under exceptions and limitations to copyright. Because of that, adding a “no AI training” clause to the CC licenses would have limited effect. We have instead tried tackling this outside of copyright with CC signals. The CC signals do not include a “no AI training” option because they are linked with IETF AI Usage Preferences that already include that option. CC signals are intended for those who want to allow machine reuse but with terms attached. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
There's a reason everyone wants to say no to AI scraping [original title]
Problem
I appreciate having a CC license as something I can use to communicate what uses of my intellectual property are okay, but I do not consent to use in AI training and I know many others feel the same way.
Description
At minimum, there has to be a license option for no consent to AI training or I will be completely done with CC.
Alternatives
There are no alternatives; I don't want my work being sucked up into an AI model without my direct, hand signed, directly compensated consent to a specific organization/trainer, and good luck getting that.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions