In a move to safeguard their interests and assert control over the rising tide of artificial intelligence, key publishers, led by media mogul Barry Diller, are on the verge of forming a powerful coalition. The coalition aims to file a lawsuit against AI tech companies that have utilized their data to train language models. Notably, the alliance comprises pillars of the media industry, including The New York Times, News Corp., and Axel Springer. As the debate intensifies over the implications of AI in media, publishers are determined to avoid the mistakes of the past and demand significant compensation for their contributions to AI advancements.
Publishers demand their share of AI tech profits
The potential shift in Google’s approach, with a focus on chatbots answering user queries rather than directing traffic to publishers’ websites, has raised alarms among publishers. Joey Levin, CEO of IAC, warns that such a transformation could strip away the attribution and context that defines the value of their content. He voices the concerns of many publishers, who fear that AI-powered language models are designed to “steal the best of the internet.” The dispute centers on the concept of fair compensation for publishers’ training data, which forms the backbone of AI technology. While tech companies have previously offered eight-figure payouts to publishers, the industry demands a more substantial share, amounting to billions of dollars.
One major challenge lies in how copyright law applies to both the inputs and outputs of AI models. Publishers are closely observing a lawsuit in Delaware, where an AI company copied legal texts from Westlaw, hoping for legal clarity on the matter. While publishers and tech giants form the coalition, Google, Microsoft, and other AI tech executives have refrained from disclosing their proposed settlement figures. The conflict hinges on the fundamental perception of what it means to be a platform and whether tech companies should pay for content, a practice largely avoided by high-margin companies like Google.
AI Tech executives struggle with uncertain business models
While publishers seek their rightful share of AI tech profits, tech executives argue that they are still grappling with defining a viable business model for AI. The costs of maintaining language models are substantial, making it difficult for tech companies to generate profits from AI ventures. Google’s spokeswoman, Jenn Crider, admits that it is still early days for large language models, and they are working on understanding the business models better. The situation has led to apprehensions on both sides, with publishers joining forces and tech companies scrambling to find a middle ground that satisfies both parties.
Despite the escalating conflict, some publishers are opting for individual negotiations with AI tech companies. The Associated Press recently struck a deal with OpenAI, and Google has developed a tool aimed at assisting journalists in writing articles. This development has caused mixed reactions among executives, with some describing it as “unsettling.” Amid the rising tensions, the AI language model ChatGPT has garnered attention for writing a novel, with Slate praising its quality as “pretty good.”
As the race to control the future of AI technology intensifies, publishers and AI tech executives find themselves at a critical juncture. The formation of the publisher coalition and their demands for a more substantial share of AI profits signal a paradigm shift in the media industry’s approach to artificial intelligence. The outcome of this high-stakes conflict will undoubtedly shape the future of AI technology and its integration into the world of journalism and content creation.
