AI Copyright Clash: Demand for Ethical Training Data & Artist Compensation
The strong backlash against Nick Clegg's idea that AI companies should bypass artist permissions for training data underscores a significant and growing shift in public sentiment. This reinforces and builds on earlier analyses, opening up several key opportunities:
-
Ethical Data Marketplaces & Licensing Platforms: There's a rising demand for services that offer ethically sourced, fully licensed, or consent-driven training data. This includes platforms that directly connect creators willing to license their work with AI developers under transparent terms.
-
Artist IP Management & Monetization Tools: Advanced tools that help artists easily register, watermark, track the use of their IP by AI systems, and manage licensing or opt-out preferences. This also includes mechanisms for fair compensation or revenue sharing.
-
Specialized Legal Tech for AI & Copyright: A growing need for legal firms and tech solutions that specialize in the intersection of AI, copyright law, intellectual property rights, and data licensing, especially for navigating international regulatory differences.
-
"Ethically Trained" AI Model Branding & Certification: A clear market opportunity for AI models and companies that can verifiably demonstrate and market their commitment to ethical data sourcing and respect for creator rights, potentially through independent certification.
-
Pro-Creator Advocacy & Consumer Awareness Campaigns: Initiatives and campaigns focused on educating the public about the importance of supporting human artists, promoting the development of AI that respects creative rights, and highlighting the value of ethically sourced data.
-
Technical Solutions for Data Provenance & Consent Management: The emergence of technologies (e.g., sophisticated metadata standards, blockchain-based registries) to transparently track the origin and licensing status of data used for AI training, and to manage creator consent at scale.
-
Alternative AI Training Methodologies: Increased research and development into AI training methods that rely less on vast quantities of indiscriminately scraped copyrighted data, such as synthetic data generation (with ethical considerations) or techniques requiring smaller, curated datasets.
Origin Reddit Post
r/futurology
Nick Clegg says asking artists for use permission would ‘kill’ the AI industry | Meta’s former head of global affairs said asking for permission from rights owners to train models would “basi
Posted by u/chrisdh79•05/31/2025
Top Comments
u/Zerodyne_Sin
As someone who used to work in the VFX industry, pirate away! It doesn't matter the sales numbers, the awards, the accolades, etc, we get fucking laid off just to eek out as much profit as p
u/NomineAbAstris
The implicit assumption is that sovereign AI is going to be some critical national resource, the absence of which will plunge the UK into the dark ages. I've yet to see convincing evidence fo
u/Don_Vicente
Especially since he's on the payroll for a pro-theft model of LLMs. His thoughts should be considered last in this argument.
u/PlaneswalkerHuxley
"Then Perish."
Or to be mildly less glib: if a business is allowed to break copyright law a million times just because it did it really fast, then you have no copyright law.
u/marrow_monkey
The current IP system doesn’t really protect artists. It protects the companies and platforms that exploit them. Most artists can’t survive on their work unless they reach some massive succes
u/hemi2hell
There is not a single decent company anymore anywhere — rotten garbage
u/daekle
Nick clegg is a twat and nobody should ever listen to him. The man sold his party for power 15 years ago, and he is more recognisably conservative now than most labour MPs. With his actions h
u/FuturologyBot
The following submission statement was provided by /u/chrisdh79:
---
From the article: As policy makers in the UK weigh how to regulate the AI industry, Nick Clegg, former UK deputy prime m
u/challengeaccepted9
Okay. And?
If I make a revolutionary industry that makes billions upon billions of money by breaking into people's homes, stealing their possessions and selling it back to them, should I no
u/AnarchistPenguin
The main difference where an end user pirating a content and the ai firm doing it is who benefits and how. If I pirate a movie and watch it, then the IP owner has a profit loss from me alone.
u/daekle
Nick clegg is a twat and nobody should ever listen to him. The man sold his party for power 15 years ago, and he is more recognisably conservative now than most labour MPs. With his actions h
u/MarcMurray92
OK great let's do that so! All we're doing now is delaying the inevitable recession that's going to come from banks over investing in technology promising to put people people out of work wit
u/Bleusilences
Yeah, my answer to that would be : Yes?
They keep telling us that piracy is an evil thing, unless they do it. I say that they should eat cake.
u/NuPNua
Yeah, imagine applying this to any other criminal behaviour. If we don't legalise heroin, my dealing business can't operate!
u/daekle
Nick clegg is a twat and nobody should ever listen to him. The man sold his party for power 15 years ago, and he is more recognisably conservative now than most labour MPs. With his actions h
u/NuPNua
Yeah, imagine applying this to any other criminal behaviour. If we don't legalise heroin, my dealing business can't operate!
u/NorskKiwi
Just wow... our privacy and rights matter more than your company.
u/TheRichTurner
Ah, Nick Clegg, Defender of the People. We remember you for your pivotal role in sending the UK down the toilet in 2010. Meta and you are a perfect marriage of pure Evil and bland amorality.
u/NomineAbAstris
The real answer is your ass is going to get beat because the law only ceases to apply if you are a corporation with sufficient money, plebs like you and me are still responsible for our actio
u/FuturologyBot
The following submission statement was provided by /u/chrisdh79:
---
From the article: As policy makers in the UK weigh how to regulate the AI industry, Nick Clegg, former UK deputy prime m
u/PlaneswalkerHuxley
"Then Perish."
Or to be mildly less glib: if a business is allowed to break copyright law a million times just because it did it really fast, then you have no copyright law.
u/NorskKiwi
Just wow... our privacy and rights matter more than your company.
u/Nerubim
Same thing people said about america and the abolishment of slavery. Newsflash anything that can't exist without crime should not exist in the first place.
u/challengeaccepted9
Okay. And?
If I make a revolutionary industry that makes billions upon billions of money by breaking into people's homes, stealing their possessions and selling it back to them, should I no
u/Initial-Fact5216
100% this should be tried in court. What's the point in NOT pirating content?
u/NuPNua
Yeah, imagine applying this to any other criminal behaviour. If we don't legalise heroin, my dealing business can't operate!
u/zapodprefect55
I think the idea of making AI industries pay for their raw material in some way is necessary. UBI for content creators would do it.
u/Laiko_Kairen
>You can also pirate content you already own because you no longer have a dvd or cd player.
Or my old SNES cartridges from the 90s. Nintendo has an eshop now, but a lot of those games ar
u/hemi2hell
There is not a single decent company anymore anywhere — rotten garbage
u/Lordert
You can also pirate content you already own because you no longer have a dvd or cd player.
u/quixotichance
So the AI companies want to create multi billion probably trillion dollar industry, but they need to license intellectual property to do that and they don't want to pay for that license
So t
u/Bleusilences
Yeah, my answer to that would be : Yes?
They keep telling us that piracy is an evil thing, unless they do it. I say that they should eat cake.
u/NomineAbAstris
New legal defense just dropped. "Your honour, my client was obviously downloading the entire Disney+ catalogue for AI training purposes, not personal consumption"
u/karoshikun
good. let it happen. it's bad enough that companies are using billions -that could go to pay their artists a decent salary- to implement AIs in the hope they won't need to hire artists anymor
u/marrow_monkey
The current IP system doesn’t really protect artists. It protects the companies and platforms that exploit them. Most artists can’t survive on their work unless they reach some massive succes
u/Laiko_Kairen
>You can also pirate content you already own because you no longer have a dvd or cd player.
Or my old SNES cartridges from the 90s. Nintendo has an eshop now, but a lot of those games ar
u/destuctir
Sort of burying the lede. Nick Clegg is saying that making UK companies ask permission, rather than making artists opt out, would kill AI production *in the uk* because other countries won’t
u/Lordert
You can also pirate content you already own because you no longer have a dvd or cd player.
u/Don_Vicente
Especially since he's on the payroll for a pro-theft model of LLMs. His thoughts should be considered last in this argument.
u/marrow_monkey
The current IP system doesn’t really protect artists. It protects the companies and platforms that exploit them. Most artists can’t survive on their work unless they reach some massive succes
u/Dangerous-Brain-
You may never have bought that thing you pirated anyway so they did not lose anything in that case and may have got a fan instead.
u/Don_Vicente
Especially since he's on the payroll for a pro-theft model of LLMs. His thoughts should be considered last in this argument.
u/Nerubim
Same thing people said about america and the abolishment of slavery. Newsflash anything that can't exist without crime should not exist in the first place.
u/ThePensiveE
So you're saying people aren't pirating enough content right? One song, $100,000 court settlement. 100,000 songs, you're okay?
u/_Robbie
"If we're not allowed to steal then our business model won't work" is the exact reason why their business model should fail.
u/_Robbie
"If we're not allowed to steal then our business model won't work" is the exact reason why their business model should fail.
u/challengeaccepted9
Okay. And?
If I make a revolutionary industry that makes billions upon billions of money by breaking into people's homes, stealing their possessions and selling it back to them, should I no
u/AnarchistPenguin
The main difference where an end user pirating a content and the ai firm doing it is who benefits and how. If I pirate a movie and watch it, then the IP owner has a profit loss from me alone.
u/YourAdvertisingPal
Well. What’s interesting with the discussion is that kinda no matter how you slice it, AI only exists because it broke the rules, and misleads the consumers of the content.
So even though h
u/zapodprefect55
I think the idea of making AI industries pay for their raw material in some way is necessary. UBI for content creators would do it.
u/FuturologyBot
The following submission statement was provided by /u/chrisdh79:
---
From the article: As policy makers in the UK weigh how to regulate the AI industry, Nick Clegg, former UK deputy prime m
u/karoshikun
good. let it happen. it's bad enough that companies are using billions -that could go to pay their artists a decent salary- to implement AIs in the hope they won't need to hire artists anymor
u/MobileEnvironment393
Funny that. We have laws. But as soon as something we like depends on breaking those laws, fuck it, trash 'em, and fuck the people those laws protect.
Now, chatGPT, make me a picture of an a
u/NomineAbAstris
New legal defense just dropped. "Your honour, my client was obviously downloading the entire Disney+ catalogue for AI training purposes, not personal consumption"
u/Dangerous-Brain-
You may never have bought that thing you pirated anyway so they did not lose anything in that case and may have got a fan instead.
u/Initial-Fact5216
100% this should be tried in court. What's the point in NOT pirating content?
u/SuperNintendad
“Basically freeing the slaves would destroy the slave-based economy in this country overnight”
u/amitkoj
Lets assume AI that imitates artist is killed. Is that such a bad thing ? What do humanity loses?
u/TheRichTurner
Ah, Nick Clegg, Defender of the People. We remember you for your pivotal role in sending the UK down the toilet in 2010. Meta and you are a perfect marriage of pure Evil and bland amorality.
u/Faiakishi
The thing is they could avoid about 90% of the concerns about AI if the rich advocated for UBI but they don't wanna do that either.
u/quixotichance
So the AI companies want to create multi billion probably trillion dollar industry, but they need to license intellectual property to do that and they don't want to pay for that license
So t
u/zapodprefect55
I think the idea of making AI industries pay for their raw material in some way is necessary. UBI for content creators would do it.
u/WanderingAlienBoy
And how is that my problem?? In fact, I'll dance on the grave of the AI industry.
u/ThePensiveE
So you're saying people aren't pirating enough content right? One song, $100,000 court settlement. 100,000 songs, you're okay?
u/NomineAbAstris
New legal defense just dropped. "Your honour, my client was obviously downloading the entire Disney+ catalogue for AI training purposes, not personal consumption"
u/AnarchistPenguin
The main difference where an end user pirating a content and the ai firm doing it is who benefits and how. If I pirate a movie and watch it, then the IP owner has a profit loss from me alone.
u/Bleusilences
Yeah, my answer to that would be : Yes?
They keep telling us that piracy is an evil thing, unless they do it. I say that they should eat cake.
u/PlaneswalkerHuxley
"Then Perish."
Or to be mildly less glib: if a business is allowed to break copyright law a million times just because it did it really fast, then you have no copyright law.
u/Dangerous-Brain-
You may never have bought that thing you pirated anyway so they did not lose anything in that case and may have got a fan instead.
u/karoshikun
good. let it happen. it's bad enough that companies are using billions -that could go to pay their artists a decent salary- to implement AIs in the hope they won't need to hire artists anymor
u/ThePensiveE
So you're saying people aren't pirating enough content right? One song, $100,000 court settlement. 100,000 songs, you're okay?
u/NomineAbAstris
The real answer is your ass is going to get beat because the law only ceases to apply if you are a corporation with sufficient money, plebs like you and me are still responsible for our actio
u/NorskKiwi
Just wow... our privacy and rights matter more than your company.
u/Nerubim
Same thing people said about america and the abolishment of slavery. Newsflash anything that can't exist without crime should not exist in the first place.
u/Initial-Fact5216
100% this should be tried in court. What's the point in NOT pirating content?