In a developing situation, former Sinn Féin president Gerry Adams has raised concerns over the alleged usage of his books by Meta, the technology conglomerate behind Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, for training its artificial intelligence (AI) systems. This revelation has sparked significant discussion regarding copyright violations, intellectual property rights, and the ethical implications surrounding the use of creative works by AI technologies.
Mr. Adams has made it clear that his books have been utilized without his permission, stating that the issue is now in the hands of his legal team. An investigation conducted by The Atlantic magazine uncovered that Meta may have gained access to an extensive array of pirated literary works and scholarly papers via Library Genesis (LibGen), a website known for distributing unauthorized copies of books and academic articles. The specific AI model purportedly impacted by these unauthorized data sources is Meta’s generative AI system, referred to as LLaMA (Large Language Model Meta AI).
In response to the controversy, a spokesperson for Meta defended the company’s practices, insisting that their use of information for training AI models aligns with existing legal frameworks on intellectual property. This assertion has not quelled the fears and frustrations of numerous authors affected by such claims. A database released by The Atlantic revealed the names of many authors whose works have reportedly been pirated, enabling them to confirm the presence of their writings on LibGen.
Authors from Northern Ireland have been particularly vocal during this controversy. Upon searching the LibGen database, several authors, including Jan Carson, Lynne Graham, Deric Henderson, and the Booker Prize-winning Anna Burns, discovered their works listed as pirated. The sentiment of outrage is widespread among the creative community, highlighting the potential harm to authors, in terms of both income and control over their intellectual property.
Additionally, Meta finds itself embroiled in ongoing legal disputes with multiple authors who contend that their works have been exploited without authorization. For instance, Michael Taylor, a historian from Ballymena whose two books feature on the LibGen database, expressed frustration over Meta’s actions. He emphasized that many writers struggle to earn a living from their books and characterized Meta’s alleged violations as a monumental act of theft.
The academic community is also voicing their concerns. Professor Monica McWilliams, a prominent figure from Northern Ireland known for her work on domestic violence and the peace process, lamented the appearance of her numerous scholarly papers on the pirate site. Her alarm arose not only from the violation of her copyright but also from the potential loss of donations that she typically directs to domestic violence charities based on the royalties of her writing.
The impact of this controversy extends further, affecting numerous writers who are standing in solidarity against Meta’s actions. Authors like Glenn Patterson from Belfast have called for collective awareness of the infringement of creative rights, urging individuals to engage with their local representatives. Patterson, a member of the Society of Authors, communicated the paradox of benefiting from AI while ensuring that the rights of authors are not harmed in the process.
Claire Allan, a successful author of psychological thrillers and romantic comedies, shared her dismay upon discovering her complete body of work listed on LibGen. She articulated her frustration over the disheartening reality of having years of effort scraped for the training of AI, underscoring the emotional toll on authors who invest deeply in their craft.
As the situation unfolds, a notable public protest occurred recently in London, wherein authors called for accountability and oversight of Meta’s actions. High-profile figures like Kate Mosse and Richard Osman signed an open letter demanding that the UK Culture Secretary bring the matter before Parliament, emphasizing the necessity of permission before utilizing an author’s work.
Furthermore, the implications of the AI model LLaMA, akin to other large language models like OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Google’s Gemini, spotlight the debate surrounding the ethical use of data in AI training. Critics have raised alarms that, despite their label as intelligent systems, such AIs lack true understanding and can negligently misrepresent facts.
Amidst this heated discourse, authors continue to advocate for compensation and acknowledgment for their contributions to ensure their rights are respected as advancements in technology evolve. The unfolding interactions between AI development, copyright law, and the creative community undoubtedly set a precedent for how similar cases may be approached in the future.