Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2404.08221

Uncertain Boundaries: Multidisciplinary Approaches to Copyright Issues in Generative AI

Archer Amon·Zhipeng Yin·Zichong Wang·Avash Palikhe·Wenbin Zhang
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Generative AI is becoming increasingly prevalent in creative fields, sparking urgent debates over how current copyright laws can keep pace with technological innovation. Recent controversies of AI models generating near-replicas of copyrighted material highlight the need to adapt current legal frameworks and develop technical methods to mitigate copyright infringement risks. This task requires understanding the intersection between computational concepts such as large-scale data scraping and probabilistic content generation, legal definitions of originality and fair use, and economic impacts on IP rights holders. However, most existing research on copyright in AI takes a purely computer science or law-based approach, leaving a gap in coordinating these approaches that only multidisciplinary efforts can effectively address. To bridge this gap, our survey adopts a comprehensive approach synthesizing insights from law, policy, economics, and computer science. It begins by discussing the foundational goals and considerations that should be applied to copyright in generative AI, followed by methods for detecting and assessing potential violations in AI system outputs. Next, it explores various regulatory options influenced by legal, policy, and economic frameworks to manage and mitigate copyright concerns associated with generative AI and reconcile the interests of IP rights holders with that of generative AI producers. The discussion then introduces techniques to safeguard individual creative works from unauthorized replication, such as watermarking and cryptographic protections. Finally, it describes advanced training strategies designed to prevent AI models from reproducing protected content. In doing so, we highlight key opportunities for action and offer actionable strategies that creators, developers, and policymakers can use in navigating the evolving copyright landscape.

Explore related subjects

cs.LGcs.AIcs.CY

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Archer Amon, Zhipeng Yin, Zichong Wang, Avash Palikhe, Wenbin Zhang. 2024-03-31. Uncertain Boundaries: Multidisciplinary Approaches to Copyright Issues in Generative AI. https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.08221

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

AUC Maximization from Biased Positive-unlabeled Data with Confidence

Maximizing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) is a standard approach to imbalanced binary classification. Although positive and negative data are required for maximizing the AUC, negative data are often difficult to collect in some real-world applications due to privacy concerns or the need for specialized expertise to annotate them. Thus, AUC maximization from positive and unlabeled (PU) data has been attracting attention. Existing methods assume that labeled positive data are unbiased samples from the true positive distribution. However, this ideal assumption is often violated in practice. In this paper, we propose a method to maximize the AUC from biased PU data. To address the bias, our key idea is to exploit {\it confidence}, i.e., the probability that an instance is positive, associated with the small number of labeled positive data. We derive an estimator of the AUC risk using biased PU data with confidence, enabling AUC maximization under such bias. We further show that the rewritten AUC risk induces a Bayes-optimal AUC ranking even when the available confidence is any strictly increasing transformation of the true posterior probability. We experimentally show the effectiveness of our method on eight real-world datasets.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

Measuring the Value of World-Model Updates: A Counterfactual Utility Protocol for Continual Adaptation

Continual world models must decide whether new data justify changing the model. Fixed replay schedules and prediction-error triggers specify when to update, but neither reveals the value of an individual update: one deployment run cannot show how the same model would have performed at that moment had it held its parameters. We introduce the fork ledger, which branches a deployment stream at pre-registered decision points into matched update and hold continuations under common random numbers. It evaluates both continuations on the same episodes and records $\Delta R = R_{\mathrm{update}} - R_{\mathrm{hold}}$. Always applying one fixed update mechanism lowers return on all three simulated control tasks: CartPole ($-144.0$; checkpoint-bootstrap $95\%$ CI $[-185.4,-116.1]$, against a converged return near $650$), Walker ($-82.8$; $[-101.1,-61.7]$) and Cheetah ($-18.6$; $[-29.0,-6.6]$). Divergence is an outcome of applying the update, so the estimand counts every attempted fork; restricted to the $693$ of $720$ that did not collapse, CartPole and Walker are unchanged in sign ($-113.4$ and $-82.1$) and Cheetah becomes unresolved ($-3.9$; $[-17.5,+13.0]$). The task is the unit of inference: each contributes $240$ attempted forks over five pretrained checkpoints crossed with two drift directions. The ledger makes counterfactual utility observable for a fixed mechanism, allowing triggers to be judged by the updates they select rather than by surprise detection alone.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

When More Is Not Better: Component Anti-Synergy in a P300 Speller

P300 brain-computer interface (BCI) spellers can provide hands-free communication for people with severe motor impairments. Modern pipelines combine multiple individually promising components, often assuming that 'more-is-better'. We tested this assumption using a four-component full-factorial experiment varying the inclusion of Euclidean Alignment (EA), xDAWN spatial filtering, subject calibration, and language model priors on a public P300 dataset. Performance was evaluated using accuracy, repetitions, and information transfer rate (ITR) with mixed-effects models. Results show that the value of components is conditional rather than additive. Calibration was the strongest singular contributor, while EA compensated for its absence in zero-calibration settings. Adding independently useful components could also reduce performance, revealing component anti-synergy. Contrary to conventional wisdom, LM support was not universally beneficial: its effect depends strongly on the strength of the underlying EEG pipeline, while results from a larger LM showed a similar pattern. Together, these findings challenge maximal 'all-on' pipeline design and highlight the value of selecting spatial and language-support components according to the quality of available EEG evidence.

cs.LG↗