WEBVTT - The great AI art heist

0:00:03.760 --> 0:00:06.760
<v Speaker 1>From the Australian. Here's what's on the front. I'm Claire Harvey.

0:00:06.840 --> 0:00:13.960
<v Speaker 1>It's Thursday August seven, twenty twenty five. Electric vehicles produced

0:00:13.960 --> 0:00:18.640
<v Speaker 1>by brands like Tesla, Byd and Kia aren't going the distance.

0:00:19.000 --> 0:00:19.480
<v Speaker 2>Literally.

0:00:19.840 --> 0:00:23.800
<v Speaker 1>Testing shows their range between charging stations is well below

0:00:23.960 --> 0:00:27.480
<v Speaker 1>what they're advertising. That story is live now at the

0:00:27.600 --> 0:00:34.120
<v Speaker 1>Australian dot Com dot au. Big tech companies want to

0:00:34.200 --> 0:00:38.280
<v Speaker 1>rewrite Australian copyright law so they can hoover up literature, film,

0:00:38.479 --> 0:00:42.839
<v Speaker 1>music and journalism to train their AI models. Now, the

0:00:42.880 --> 0:00:47.320
<v Speaker 1>Productivity Commission is considering the idea that artists are furious

0:00:47.680 --> 0:00:48.560
<v Speaker 1>today the.

0:00:48.440 --> 0:00:51.040
<v Speaker 2>War over who owns our culture.

0:00:59.000 --> 0:01:02.840
<v Speaker 1>He's one of Australian biggest stars, the kid Laroi, an

0:01:02.880 --> 0:01:06.679
<v Speaker 1>Indigenous rapper and singer from Inner Sydney. His mates with

0:01:06.720 --> 0:01:10.679
<v Speaker 1>the likes of Justin Bieber and the Aria goes.

0:01:10.440 --> 0:01:15.320
<v Speaker 3>To all Right, your iHeartRadio Music Award winner the Billboard

0:01:15.319 --> 0:01:18.119
<v Speaker 3>Heart One hunter has a new leader, the kid Larie.

0:01:17.760 --> 0:01:23.840
<v Speaker 4>Fur thousand miles the kid Larie, But the.

0:01:23.880 --> 0:01:28.840
<v Speaker 1>Kid Laroy's biggest fan is chat gpt I decided to

0:01:28.880 --> 0:01:35.640
<v Speaker 1>do an experiment analyze the kid Laroi's lyrics for me.

0:01:36.760 --> 0:01:39.920
<v Speaker 3>The kid Laroi's lyrics explore themes that resonate deeply with

0:01:39.959 --> 0:01:45.440
<v Speaker 3>his audience, particularly focusing on love, heartbreak, fame and personal growth.

0:01:46.040 --> 0:01:50.080
<v Speaker 3>Here's an analysis of these major themes, love and heartbreak.

0:01:50.480 --> 0:01:51.200
<v Speaker 2>You get the picture.

0:01:51.640 --> 0:01:54.680
<v Speaker 1>When I ask chat gpt to show me its sources,

0:01:54.760 --> 0:01:58.240
<v Speaker 1>it references a bunch of websites with many articles written

0:01:58.240 --> 0:02:02.360
<v Speaker 1>by Ai. Okay, let's ask it to do something really

0:02:02.480 --> 0:02:03.960
<v Speaker 1>unique to Australia.

0:02:04.080 --> 0:02:05.680
<v Speaker 2>Can you write.

0:02:05.360 --> 0:02:09.560
<v Speaker 1>A song in the style of the kid Laroi about

0:02:09.720 --> 0:02:11.800
<v Speaker 1>Murray River red gums.

0:02:12.760 --> 0:02:16.800
<v Speaker 3>Absolutely, here's a song inspired by the kid Laroi's style,

0:02:17.360 --> 0:02:20.320
<v Speaker 3>focusing on the majestic Murray River red gums, with that

0:02:20.440 --> 0:02:25.919
<v Speaker 3>mix of raw emotion, vivid imagery and youthful reflection. Down

0:02:25.960 --> 0:02:29.480
<v Speaker 3>by the river where the red gums grow, roots run deep,

0:02:29.720 --> 0:02:33.040
<v Speaker 3>but the water's running low. Leaves whisper stories that the

0:02:33.080 --> 0:02:35.960
<v Speaker 3>old winds know, trying to find a place where my

0:02:36.120 --> 0:02:37.480
<v Speaker 3>heart can go.

0:02:38.000 --> 0:02:41.600
<v Speaker 2>It goes on like that for another eight stanzas, and.

0:02:41.480 --> 0:02:43.840
<v Speaker 3>Then want me to help make it sound more like

0:02:43.880 --> 0:02:47.000
<v Speaker 3>a full song with melody ideas or production tips.

0:02:47.680 --> 0:02:50.360
<v Speaker 1>Now the bot is off and away. It writes the

0:02:50.440 --> 0:02:52.640
<v Speaker 1>chord progression and the melody C.

0:02:52.880 --> 0:02:56.000
<v Speaker 3>Major A flat E flat B flat.

0:02:56.160 --> 0:02:57.800
<v Speaker 2>Then orchestrates the whole thing.

0:02:58.200 --> 0:03:01.800
<v Speaker 3>Use a trap influenced beat, but keep it mellow, seventy

0:03:01.840 --> 0:03:05.040
<v Speaker 3>to ninety beats per minut. It works well. Use soft

0:03:05.120 --> 0:03:08.240
<v Speaker 3>atmospheric piano or synthats, and it doesn't want to stop.

0:03:08.480 --> 0:03:10.560
<v Speaker 3>Want me to record a rough humming track for you.

0:03:11.360 --> 0:03:14.240
<v Speaker 1>Now, all that's happened without the kid ler Roy seeing

0:03:14.240 --> 0:03:15.799
<v Speaker 1>a sent ur, even being.

0:03:15.600 --> 0:03:19.240
<v Speaker 2>Aware that it's happened. I could record this album.

0:03:18.919 --> 0:03:22.800
<v Speaker 1>And release it without leaving my desk. Has AI just

0:03:22.919 --> 0:03:32.000
<v Speaker 1>helped me steal someone's work? Or is all this fair enough? Artists,

0:03:32.160 --> 0:03:34.600
<v Speaker 1>musicians and writers are up in arms about a new

0:03:34.680 --> 0:03:39.120
<v Speaker 1>report from the Productivity Commission. It suggested the enthusiastic embrace

0:03:39.200 --> 0:03:43.040
<v Speaker 1>of generative AI tools could inject billions into our economy,

0:03:43.440 --> 0:03:47.800
<v Speaker 1>and it's considering relaxing copyright rules to help get there.

0:03:48.440 --> 0:03:51.880
<v Speaker 1>I hashed it out with The Australian's media editor James Madden.

0:03:52.920 --> 0:03:55.680
<v Speaker 5>The devil is in the detail with this report. Now,

0:03:55.760 --> 0:03:58.600
<v Speaker 5>it's an interim report and these are just ideas being

0:03:58.640 --> 0:04:02.040
<v Speaker 5>put forward by the product Commission, But at its heart,

0:04:02.640 --> 0:04:06.320
<v Speaker 5>the idea being put out there is that big tech

0:04:06.760 --> 0:04:12.720
<v Speaker 5>AI companies should have the right to access, potentially the

0:04:12.760 --> 0:04:19.120
<v Speaker 5>copyright of a raft of creative professions, including journalism, music, art,

0:04:19.480 --> 0:04:20.760
<v Speaker 5>poetry books.

0:04:22.240 --> 0:04:26.280
<v Speaker 1>The Productivity Commission's report says AIS are already being trained

0:04:26.320 --> 0:04:30.520
<v Speaker 1>on Australian music, literature and film. The options for dealing

0:04:30.560 --> 0:04:34.039
<v Speaker 1>with it are licensing. So an AI creator wants to

0:04:34.040 --> 0:04:37.480
<v Speaker 1>feed the kid Laroy's entire catalog of songs or every

0:04:37.520 --> 0:04:40.560
<v Speaker 1>book about Murray River red Gums into an AI and

0:04:40.680 --> 0:04:42.960
<v Speaker 1>ask it to learn from them. That have to register

0:04:43.040 --> 0:04:45.479
<v Speaker 1>what they were doing and then pay a license fee

0:04:45.560 --> 0:04:50.000
<v Speaker 1>to the artists and the authors, or enforcement that is

0:04:50.120 --> 0:04:54.640
<v Speaker 1>court action, takedown notices or mediation. But the Productivity Commission

0:04:54.680 --> 0:04:57.840
<v Speaker 1>says there are gaps in the existing copyright regime, so

0:04:58.040 --> 0:05:01.000
<v Speaker 1>it's not even keeping up at the moment. That leaves

0:05:01.080 --> 0:05:04.520
<v Speaker 1>us back with licensing as a possible future option. So

0:05:04.760 --> 0:05:07.680
<v Speaker 1>artists could be paid for allowing AI to learn from

0:05:07.720 --> 0:05:11.240
<v Speaker 1>their work. But here's the twist. The big tech companies

0:05:11.279 --> 0:05:14.160
<v Speaker 1>don't want to pay at all. They want something called

0:05:14.240 --> 0:05:18.280
<v Speaker 1>a fair dealing exception for text and data mining.

0:05:20.960 --> 0:05:21.960
<v Speaker 2>Fair dealing is one.

0:05:21.880 --> 0:05:24.160
<v Speaker 1>Of those phrases you hear a lot when people are

0:05:24.200 --> 0:05:28.080
<v Speaker 1>talking about copyright under the Commonwealth Copyright Act, there's a

0:05:28.120 --> 0:05:32.839
<v Speaker 1>fair dealing exception for news, critique, research and parity. So

0:05:33.080 --> 0:05:35.880
<v Speaker 1>let's take the Kidler Roy again. If someone's doing a

0:05:35.920 --> 0:05:39.520
<v Speaker 1>news story about his new tour, or reviewing his new album,

0:05:39.800 --> 0:05:43.120
<v Speaker 1>or studying his lyrics for a UNI presentation, or doing

0:05:43.160 --> 0:05:46.359
<v Speaker 1>a stand up comedy routine about him, it's considered fair

0:05:46.440 --> 0:05:49.920
<v Speaker 1>to use some of his work without breaching his copyright

0:05:50.279 --> 0:05:52.680
<v Speaker 1>as long as you properly attribute it to him and

0:05:52.839 --> 0:05:56.200
<v Speaker 1>only use a small amount. That means it wouldn't be

0:05:56.240 --> 0:05:58.400
<v Speaker 1>okay to take his music and turn it into an

0:05:58.440 --> 0:06:01.960
<v Speaker 1>ad for a new hatchback. That's a commercial purpose, which

0:06:02.000 --> 0:06:04.279
<v Speaker 1>means you'd have to negotiate with him for the rights

0:06:04.320 --> 0:06:07.599
<v Speaker 1>and likely pay millions of dollars. So the question with

0:06:07.720 --> 0:06:11.400
<v Speaker 1>AI is is it more like an album review or more.

0:06:11.240 --> 0:06:12.239
<v Speaker 2>Like a hatchback ad?

0:06:12.600 --> 0:06:16.479
<v Speaker 1>That is, is AI fairly consuming information in order to

0:06:16.520 --> 0:06:20.760
<v Speaker 1>analyze it, or is AI repackaging it and robbing the

0:06:20.800 --> 0:06:26.040
<v Speaker 1>creator of their work. It's something that the tech titans

0:06:26.080 --> 0:06:28.400
<v Speaker 1>are very keen on. Scott farquhas spoke to the National

0:06:28.440 --> 0:06:30.200
<v Speaker 1>Press Club the other day that one of the co

0:06:30.240 --> 0:06:32.800
<v Speaker 1>founders of at Lassian and this is his big ask

0:06:32.880 --> 0:06:33.240
<v Speaker 1>wasn't it.

0:06:33.720 --> 0:06:36.120
<v Speaker 4>Australia's copyright wars are out of sync with the rest

0:06:36.120 --> 0:06:39.520
<v Speaker 4>of the world. We're in a perverse situation where copyright

0:06:39.520 --> 0:06:42.200
<v Speaker 4>holders don't see a single dollar of extra money as

0:06:42.240 --> 0:06:44.600
<v Speaker 4>a result of our wars. But we also don't we

0:06:44.640 --> 0:06:47.200
<v Speaker 4>miss out on the economic upside of hosting and training

0:06:47.200 --> 0:06:48.240
<v Speaker 4>models in Australia.

0:06:49.360 --> 0:06:53.120
<v Speaker 5>This is the fuel that powers their machines. And I

0:06:53.120 --> 0:06:55.800
<v Speaker 5>suppose what they want is the top grade fuel, and

0:06:55.839 --> 0:06:58.560
<v Speaker 5>they want it all and this is their business model,

0:06:59.240 --> 0:07:01.520
<v Speaker 5>and I don't want to pay for it. It's as

0:07:01.520 --> 0:07:04.040
<v Speaker 5>simple as that, and you would have seen the outcry

0:07:04.120 --> 0:07:08.120
<v Speaker 5>from a raft of industry leaders making the point that

0:07:08.200 --> 0:07:12.040
<v Speaker 5>in what other industry is it okay to steal others'

0:07:12.080 --> 0:07:14.400
<v Speaker 5>content and monetize it for your own good.

0:07:14.600 --> 0:07:14.800
<v Speaker 2>Yes.

0:07:14.840 --> 0:07:17.120
<v Speaker 1>So, on one side we have big tech companies that

0:07:17.160 --> 0:07:20.320
<v Speaker 1>are training AI models right now, models like Chat, GBT

0:07:20.560 --> 0:07:24.560
<v Speaker 1>and Gemini. On the other side, we have organizations like

0:07:24.600 --> 0:07:28.760
<v Speaker 1>News Corp Australia, which owns the Australian media companies, Creative

0:07:28.760 --> 0:07:31.600
<v Speaker 1>Australia and the government agencies that represent artists and all

0:07:31.640 --> 0:07:35.800
<v Speaker 1>sorts of arts companies. What basically do those arts and

0:07:35.840 --> 0:07:37.280
<v Speaker 1>media companies want.

0:07:37.720 --> 0:07:40.480
<v Speaker 5>They want the right for the content creators to retain

0:07:40.840 --> 0:07:43.360
<v Speaker 5>the copyright to their own work.

0:07:43.960 --> 0:07:46.720
<v Speaker 1>They basically want the copyright law as it exists not

0:07:46.760 --> 0:07:48.720
<v Speaker 1>to change. They're happy with the status quo.

0:07:48.960 --> 0:07:51.880
<v Speaker 5>That's correct. And of course one of the concerns too,

0:07:52.480 --> 0:07:55.960
<v Speaker 5>I think from Creative Australia and OPRA and others has

0:07:56.040 --> 0:07:59.000
<v Speaker 5>been the concern that is this a push by AI

0:07:59.560 --> 0:08:05.280
<v Speaker 5>to wreck respectively justify the use of other people's content

0:08:05.720 --> 0:08:08.840
<v Speaker 5>for their own profit. The Industry Minister Timy has came

0:08:08.880 --> 0:08:12.160
<v Speaker 5>out in response to the Productivity Commission report and said

0:08:12.160 --> 0:08:15.800
<v Speaker 5>the Australian Government has no plans to change the copyright law,

0:08:16.280 --> 0:08:20.320
<v Speaker 5>and the Coalitions spokesman Julian Lisa said a similar thing too.

0:08:20.520 --> 0:08:23.200
<v Speaker 5>What you do have to remember though, is these AI

0:08:23.520 --> 0:08:28.560
<v Speaker 5>companies are powerful lobbyists and have the means and the

0:08:28.640 --> 0:08:32.280
<v Speaker 5>wealth to exert an enormous amount of pressure on the

0:08:32.280 --> 0:08:34.640
<v Speaker 5>Australian government and governments around the world for that matter.

0:08:34.960 --> 0:08:38.680
<v Speaker 5>But at this stage, certainly perhaps in response to the

0:08:38.720 --> 0:08:42.000
<v Speaker 5>reaction from various professions and the industry leaders, the government

0:08:42.080 --> 0:08:44.079
<v Speaker 5>has indicated that there will be no change to the

0:08:44.120 --> 0:08:45.400
<v Speaker 5>copyright law for now.

0:08:45.880 --> 0:08:49.199
<v Speaker 1>News Corps, publisher of the Australians very strong views that

0:08:49.240 --> 0:08:50.960
<v Speaker 1>they should not get that exemption.

0:08:51.760 --> 0:08:53.880
<v Speaker 2>Why would that exemption make a difference.

0:08:54.480 --> 0:08:57.000
<v Speaker 5>It would basically give the AI companies a foot in

0:08:57.040 --> 0:08:59.840
<v Speaker 5>the door. The exemption that's been talked about here is

0:08:59.840 --> 0:09:04.080
<v Speaker 5>a fair dealing exemption for something called text and data mining,

0:09:04.760 --> 0:09:08.120
<v Speaker 5>which would give AI companies the right to use content

0:09:08.200 --> 0:09:11.520
<v Speaker 5>for research and study purposes, which again is probably a

0:09:11.520 --> 0:09:15.320
<v Speaker 5>euphemism for theft if we're to be honest. And what

0:09:15.360 --> 0:09:17.920
<v Speaker 5>that would do is allow them to detect patterns and

0:09:18.000 --> 0:09:22.480
<v Speaker 5>trends in content and that, so the argument goes, is

0:09:22.520 --> 0:09:26.800
<v Speaker 5>the slippery slope to Hollis bolus consumption of other people's content.

0:09:28.280 --> 0:09:31.760
<v Speaker 1>I took James through my kid LaRoy t GPT experiment.

0:09:32.440 --> 0:09:35.440
<v Speaker 5>It's a really good example, actually, notwithstanding the fact that

0:09:35.440 --> 0:09:37.360
<v Speaker 5>I doubt the kid LaRoy will ever sing about red

0:09:37.360 --> 0:09:40.280
<v Speaker 5>gum from the Murray. However, one of the points that

0:09:40.679 --> 0:09:44.200
<v Speaker 5>arose from the PC report was that once you give

0:09:44.360 --> 0:09:47.720
<v Speaker 5>a little ground on copyright law, you're actually giving a

0:09:47.720 --> 0:09:51.840
<v Speaker 5>lot in this regard because it is virtually impossible to

0:09:51.960 --> 0:09:57.760
<v Speaker 5>detect theft of copyright under AI because of the various

0:09:57.840 --> 0:10:01.560
<v Speaker 5>layers that material goes through. For example, the kid Lroy

0:10:01.640 --> 0:10:06.760
<v Speaker 5>could never actually pursue that case, presumably because it's just

0:10:06.840 --> 0:10:10.319
<v Speaker 5>so hard to detect where this theft has come from

0:10:11.040 --> 0:10:13.200
<v Speaker 5>how would stand up in the court of law. So

0:10:13.840 --> 0:10:17.520
<v Speaker 5>that has been one of the arguments about the so

0:10:17.640 --> 0:10:21.560
<v Speaker 5>called exemption that's been floated by the PC, in that

0:10:22.760 --> 0:10:27.360
<v Speaker 5>tweaks to copyright law would potentially just effectively be a

0:10:27.400 --> 0:10:31.040
<v Speaker 5>trojan horse into a much greater problem, whereby once the

0:10:31.080 --> 0:10:32.920
<v Speaker 5>ground is given, you can never get it back.

0:10:36.720 --> 0:10:39.120
<v Speaker 2>Coming up. Can this bell be unwrung?

0:10:56.600 --> 0:11:00.280
<v Speaker 1>Has the horse already bolted here? Clearly gbt he knows

0:11:00.280 --> 0:11:01.880
<v Speaker 1>a lot about the kid la Roy already.

0:11:02.400 --> 0:11:04.959
<v Speaker 2>Is it too late to be making any changes?

0:11:05.120 --> 0:11:07.679
<v Speaker 5>No, I don't think it's too late. I think a

0:11:07.760 --> 0:11:12.040
<v Speaker 5>strain copyright law is sound as it currently sits, and

0:11:12.240 --> 0:11:15.320
<v Speaker 5>it is considered gold standard the world over because it

0:11:15.320 --> 0:11:19.520
<v Speaker 5>does afford significant protections for creatives. I don't think it's

0:11:19.520 --> 0:11:23.640
<v Speaker 5>too late. But just as the argument was put forward

0:11:23.760 --> 0:11:27.920
<v Speaker 5>in the PC's report that perhaps copyright law hasn't kept

0:11:27.960 --> 0:11:31.160
<v Speaker 5>pace with the rise of AI technology, I think the

0:11:31.200 --> 0:11:35.160
<v Speaker 5>flip side is also true, in that creative professions need

0:11:35.200 --> 0:11:38.320
<v Speaker 5>to try and keep a step ahead of the rise

0:11:38.360 --> 0:11:41.720
<v Speaker 5>of AI and fiercely defend the copyright law for what

0:11:41.760 --> 0:11:45.240
<v Speaker 5>it does for them. At present, the PC's doing its

0:11:45.320 --> 0:11:47.440
<v Speaker 5>job effectively and I think they cited a number in

0:11:47.440 --> 0:11:51.480
<v Speaker 5>that report saying potentially loosening copyright laws could open up

0:11:51.480 --> 0:11:53.679
<v Speaker 5>one hundred and sixteen billion dollars of investment in the

0:11:53.679 --> 0:11:56.280
<v Speaker 5>Australian economy. When you super all back, do we want

0:11:56.280 --> 0:11:59.440
<v Speaker 5>to live in a world where the creative professions are

0:11:59.480 --> 0:12:04.239
<v Speaker 5>marginalized to the point where there is no incentive to

0:12:04.280 --> 0:12:06.920
<v Speaker 5>pursue that craft. I don't.

0:12:14.760 --> 0:12:17.800
<v Speaker 1>You can read James's reporting on everything happening in the media,

0:12:17.920 --> 0:12:21.040
<v Speaker 1>as well as all the nation's best news, sport, politics

0:12:21.080 --> 0:12:24.280
<v Speaker 1>and business right now at the Australian dot com dot

0:12:24.280 --> 0:12:24.600
<v Speaker 1>au