Academic

AI copyright policy considerations for Botswana and South Africa – Compensation for starving artists feeding generative AI

The balancing act which domestic intellectual property policy is now challenged to strike is between fostering growth in technological innovation and incentivising creative labour. Ordinarily, these two considerations should not be mutually exclusive, but generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI) has led to a line being drawn in the sand. On one hand, AI undeniably has the potential to exert a profound societal impact, an outcome which shouldn’t be unnecessarily stifled, as onerous barriers to data access would undermine the ideal objectives of copyright policy. On the other hand, creative labourers are still subject to the inherent peculiarities of their industry, which faces further disruption despite their works forming part of Gen AI training data. A few cases worldwide illustrate this standoff, wherein artists contend that automation threatens to disrupt an already precarious creative industry and seek, inter alia, compensation for the use of their works. In light of these polar

S
Setso Dennis Mareka
· · 1 min read · 13 views

The balancing act which domestic intellectual property policy is now challenged to strike is between fostering growth in technological innovation and incentivising creative labour. Ordinarily, these two considerations should not be mutually exclusive, but generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI) has led to a line being drawn in the sand. On one hand, AI undeniably has the potential to exert a profound societal impact, an outcome which shouldn’t be unnecessarily stifled, as onerous barriers to data access would undermine the ideal objectives of copyright policy. On the other hand, creative labourers are still subject to the inherent peculiarities of their industry, which faces further disruption despite their works forming part of Gen AI training data. A few cases worldwide illustrate this standoff, wherein artists contend that automation threatens to disrupt an already precarious creative industry and seek, inter alia, compensation for the use of their works. In light of these polarised viewpoints, a socio-legal and tech-neutral approach is required to analyse whether a balance could be struck in light of Botswana and South Africa’s copyright policies and whether artists could be compensated for this type of use. The legal basis for a claim of compensation will be ascertained first and shall entail determining the manner in which Gen AI infringes upon artists’ exclusive rights, and utilise protected works in a manner which would ordinarily warrant remuneration. This analysis shall be informed by a discussion on the polarising interests involved, the normative justifications for said copyright protection, and the corresponding rationales for its limitations. Before concluding, this article shall evaluate the feasibility of recommendations for fair remuneration frameworks in the context of Botswana and South Africa. It will be suggested that, ideally, CMOs ought to utilise metadata and watermarking measures to trace their members’ works across training data sets and ultimately claim compensation on their behalf. However, it is ultimately found that said CMOs in these countries ought to drastically increase their technical ability to monitor online acts of infringement.

Executive Summary

The article explores the challenges of balancing technological innovation with creative labour incentives in the context of generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI) in Botswana and South Africa. It analyzes the copyright policy considerations and the potential for compensating artists whose works are used to train Gen AI models. The article argues that a socio-legal and tech-neutral approach is necessary to strike a balance between fostering innovation and protecting creative rights.

Key Points

  • The need to balance technological innovation with creative labour incentives
  • The potential for Gen AI to disrupt the creative industry and the need for compensation for artists
  • The importance of a socio-legal and tech-neutral approach to copyright policy considerations

Merits

Comprehensive analysis

The article provides a thorough analysis of the complex issues surrounding Gen AI and copyright policy in Botswana and South Africa.

Demerits

Limited technical expertise

The article notes that collective management organizations (CMOs) in Botswana and South Africa lack the technical ability to effectively monitor online infringement and claim compensation on behalf of artists.

Expert Commentary

The article raises important questions about the intersection of technology and creative labour, and the need for a nuanced approach to copyright policy that balances innovation with protection for artists and creators. The proposed solution of utilizing metadata and watermarking measures to track and claim compensation for artists' works is a promising approach, but ultimately, the success of such measures will depend on the development of effective technical expertise and infrastructure.

Recommendations

  • CMOs in Botswana and South Africa should invest in developing technical expertise to monitor and claim compensation for online infringement
  • Policymakers should consider reforms to copyright policy that balance technological innovation with creative labour incentives and protect intellectual property rights

Sources