Some author advocacy teams have pushed for this sort of licensing as an alternative choice to information scraping. The Author’s Guild, for instance, is at the moment agitating for collective licensing agreements to make sure that writers are paid when their work is used as coaching information for AI firms. The News Media Alliance, a commerce affiliation that represents over 2,000 newspapers and magazines within the US, praised Axel Springer’s cope with OpenAI. “These business arrangements are a good start in setting benchmarks for payment, demonstrating precedent of value,” CEO Danielle Coffey stated in a press release.
Axel Springer characterised the partnership as a win for journalists, a method to introduce new audiences to their work and assist the corporate prosper. “This benefits the journalists as well as the journalism of the brands involved in the partnership,” Axel Springer spokesperson Julia Sommerfield says.
Does it, though? Mike Masnick, editor of the tech policy website Techdirt, has doubts. “It looks like a strategy that we’ll likely see repeated elsewhere, a ‘partnership’ that is effectively the AI companies convincing publishers not to sue them in exchange for some level of access to the technology,” he says. “That access might help the journalists very indirectly, but it’s not flowing into paychecks or realistically making their jobs any easier.”
Axel Springer declined to comment on specifics of the deal. “I can only reiterate our reasons for entering this partnership which is that we see a paradigm shift in journalism: For the first time, there’s a revenue stream from an AI company to a media company for the use of recent content,” Sommerfeld says. “This is exactly what media companies failed to establish back in the day with Google or Facebook—and we’re still chasing those platforms for compensation.”
Bloomberg reported final week that OpenAI can pay Axel Springer tens of thousands and thousands of euros, however it’s totally unclear whether or not particular person journalists will see any of that cash. When requested if reporters would profit from any revenue-sharing or extra compensation on account of the licensing association, Axel Springer didn’t instantly reply the query. “The deal is set to be structured in a way that does not infringe on any individual IP or copyright,” Sommerfeld stated. So, as of now, it’s unclear whether or not a author whose work is integrated into ChatGPT will obtain a one-time cost, a recurring royalty-like cost, or no cost in any respect.