I have been thinking about the current media coverage of AI and copyright. Here are my views as expressed in a letter to my MP.
15 Upper Village
Road
Ascot SL5 7BA
(01344) 626387
ianjacobsipswich@gmail.com
Jack Rankin, MP
House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA
12 December 2024
Dear Mr Rankin,
The Data (Use and Access) Bill
I write as a constituent with some knowledge and experience
of copyright and intellectual property (IP) rights in general. I worked for
forty years as a publisher with Macmillan, Oxford University Press New York,
and Thames & Hudson. I dealt with IP in books, music, art and digital
media. I was involved in combatting book piracy in China, South Korea, the USA
and Australia, and at Thames & Hudson online piracy.
The British publishing industry is second only to the USA in
English-language publishing and operates on a global scale. It is economically
and culturally much more significant than many realize and should be protected
as a national asset by the UK government. I recall a meeting in the early 2000s
with a Vice President from Microsoft who demonstrated a new technology that
reproduced type very crisply and clearly on a screen, a forerunner of e-readers
such as Kindle. The people from Microsoft showed us a timeline that predicted
that print newspapers and printed books would cease to exist long before now.
Books, to the contrary, have continued to increase in sales. In short, beware
of technology lobbyists who predict the future: they predict a future that
suits their interests.
The technology industry, particularly the big Silicon Valley
companies are fiercely protective of their own IP, but experience has already
taught us that they violate the copyrights of others without compunction.
Google set the precedent more than two decades ago, digitizing books (in
copyright as well as out of copyright) without permission to create an online
library of digitized books, claiming fair use (in the USA; fair dealing in the
UK, a slightly different legal concept). Google’s arguments were without any
foundation, simply a specious justification of theft of IP which the company
would not have tolerated if the theft has been of their IP. After legal
arguments, a settlement was reached with publishers.
Now, the AI developers are stealing IP again, this time
using without permission not only printed books, but all media that are
protected by copyright. I read a newspaper article recently about the CEO of
Meta in the UK who is lobbying to allow the use of copyright material unless
copyright owners opt out. If I, as a publisher, wanted to use copyright
material in a book I was legally obliged to apply for permission. I can think
of books which included the IP of Apple and Microsoft – had I not applied for
permission I am sure I would have been pursued by their legal departments. Why
should the same not apply to them?
I urge you not to be deceived by the technology lobbyists
and to vote to protect important UK industries that are of global importance.
Yours sincerely,
Ian Jacobs