 Subjects -> PATENTS, TRADEMARKS AND COPYRIGHTS (Total: 28 journals)
|
|
|
- Good Readers, Good Writers, and AI: Tool, Collaborator, Author'
Authors: Katherine Jung
Abstract: Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) systems have revolutionized the world of creative writing. Beyond providing simple grammar or spelling assistance, the most advanced of these systems can now play a collaborative role in the writing process, increasing productivity while pushing content in new and surprising directions. AI-generated creativity raises compelling questions in the context of copyright law, which has long been predicated on the assumption of human authorship. The capacity of AI to one day generate writing at a level of mastery on par with human beings complicates traditional notions of creativity, the protection of which the entire copyright system has been built on. This Note seeks to explore the ways in which creativity continues to be defined and redefined in the context of AI and how advanced deep learning models like GPT have innovated the field of creative writing. In this Note, I consider where AI-generated narratives fit within traditional copyright theory and existing legal requirements for copyright protection, whether a machine can meet the standards for creativity and originality, alternative models available for AI-generated creativity, and how a model incorporating legal subjectivity for AI and joint-ownership theory can address some of the most pressing legal issues facing copyright law as AI systems grow more autonomous.
PubDate: Fri, 24 May 2024 20:15:59 PDT
- The Use of Clearview AI to Support Warrants Violates the Fourth Amendment
Authors: Kevin Johnson
Abstract: Social media platforms encouraged millions of Americans to post hundreds of photos of themselves on the Internet. Clearview AI, a tool that harnesses “publicly available” online images for facial recognition, violated those platforms’ terms of service to collect those photos and in doing so de-anonymized millions of Americans. This Note examines the Fourth Amendment implications of law enforcement’s use of Clearview AI and its compatibility with constitutional protections. This Note argues that the use of Clearview AI by police to support warrant applications runs afoul of established legal standards by analyzing the evolution of Fourth Amendment jurisprudence in light of technological advancements.The foundation of the argument is twofold: first, that the current jurisprudential landscape has increasingly recognized the need to adapt constitutional protections to the digital age, acknowledging the unique capabilities of digital surveillance to bypass traditional privacy safeguards; and second, that Clearview AI embodies a form of digital surveillance that is particularly invasive due to its comprehensive and indiscriminate collection of personal data. This Note delves into how Clearview AI’s capabilities trigger the very concerns the Fourth Amendment intends to protect against—preventing law-abiding citizens from being put in a perpetual police line-up without probable cause or judicial oversight.
PubDate: Fri, 24 May 2024 20:15:56 PDT
- Anti-Drag Laws and Free Speech: The First Amendment Case for Protecting
Drag
Authors: Dr. Joel Timmer
Abstract: In 2023, there were six federal court cases involving anti-drag laws or government denials of permission to hold drag shows on public property. All but one of these cases concluded that drag shows constituted expressive conduct protected by the First Amendment. Four of the cases involved challenges to recently enacted anti-drag laws, and in each of those cases, the courts found the laws to violate the First Amendment on multiple grounds, including not being narrowly tailored to achieve their purpose, as well as being vague and overbroad. However, one court, ruling on a denial of permission to hold a drag show, concluded that drag shows were not protected by the First Amendment. This Article considers these court decisions on state anti-drag laws and the reasons the laws were found to be unconstitutional. It also considers court arguments for and against providing protection to drag shows as expressive conduct under the First Amendment, concluding that drag shows do qualify for First Amendment protection.
PubDate: Fri, 24 May 2024 20:15:53 PDT
- A Glance Not Taken—When Claim Interpretation Ignores the Best
Evidence
Authors: David R. Soucy; Esq.
Abstract: A little-known but longstanding rule of patent law is that the article “a” means one or more than one when recited within a patent claim. But the commonly understood meaning of “a” is a numerosity of just one. The case of Salazar v. AT&T Mobility is about the misapplication of the patent law general rule of indefinite articles to find that the term “a microprocessor” means just one microchip. That fundamental tenet states that “a” means one or more than one, unless a patentee disavowed that meaning as evidenced by: (1) other language of the claims (i.e., dependent claims or other text of the claim at issue), (2) the remainder of the specification (e.g., the detailed description or figures), or (3) statements recorded in prosecution history. Unfortunately, the courts did not properly apply the general rule. Rather, the Federal District Court, for instance, relied on the recitation of definite articles that referred back to the phrase “a microprocessor” as an exception to the general rule. But such language does not invoke a patentee’s intent about numerosity but rather is required by the antecedent basis rules of the Patent Office. This rationale is more akin to the common understanding of “a” rather than the patent law rule. A fair reading of “a microprocessor” as recited in the claims is that the phrase means either one or more than one—nothing recited therein would prevent either interpretation. The Federal Circuit fared no better in its analysis. There the court made misstatements of law concerning the transitional phrase “comprising” invoking the general rule. But transitional phrases affect the scope of the claims as a whole, not individual terms recited therein. Further, the court relied on flawed precedent that also neglected to look at the best evidence (i.e., the rest of the patent specification) to determine an inventor’s intent. Consequently, the courts’ decisions in Salazar offer incomplete analyses of the issue justified by other precedent with piecemeal, claim-centric reasoning. Absent anything more (i.e., other limiting claim language or statements in the specification or prosecution history), the courts should have ruled the other way. But there was more. The patent included a robust description of the invention that evidenced a clear intent that the claims be limited to a single microprocessor. Thus, the courts arrived at the correct conclusion but for all the wrong reasons. And this is unfortunate because the courts’ claims-only approach eliminates the rule of indefinite articles altogether. The decisions now make a singular meaning of indefinite articles a guaranteed result.
PubDate: Fri, 24 May 2024 20:15:51 PDT
- Cross-Border Data Regulatory Frameworks: Opportunities, Challenges, and a
Future- Forward Agenda
Authors: Andrew D. Mitchell et al.
Abstract: This Article evaluates the existing regulatory framework for cross-border data flows across Bahrain, Djibouti, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Rwanda, and Saudi Arabia. A common factor among these countries is that they are members of the Digital Cooperation Organization (“DCO”). It considers how these countries have devised laws, regulations, and policies on cross-border data flows to enable digital trade, and how these instruments promote the growth of a robust digital economy, both domestically and internationally. The Article then offers policy recommendations for DCO members to consider in developing relevant laws and regulations on data flows. These recommendations focus on three main areas: facilitating data enablers, improving data safeguards, and minimizing data restrictions. In terms of facilitating data enablers, the Article recommends that DCO members engage in regional negotiations to create mechanisms for cross-border data flows for digital trade, update their regulatory frameworks to participate in existing mechanisms such as the Cross-Border Privacy Rules (“CBPR”) mechanism, and actively consider participating in digital trade negotiations. For improving data safeguards, the Article recommends that DCO members implement and enforce data protection laws and regulations, consider joining the Global Privacy Assembly, and establish independent data protection authorities. In terms of minimizing data restrictions, the Article recommends that DCO members review and remove any existing data localization requirements, avoid enacting new data localization measures, and develop mechanisms for cross-border data transfers that are consistent with international standards.
PubDate: Fri, 24 May 2024 20:15:48 PDT
- The Marketplace of Ideas Mandate: What the Postal Power Requires from
Congress in the Age of AI
Authors: Kevin Frazier
Abstract: Given the impending glut of AI-altered content that threatens to distort the flow of information on social media platforms, this Article comes at an inflection point. Absent the widespread adoption of a historically-accurate understanding of the obligation of the federal government to facilitate the spread of news and views on current affairs, the public may soon lose its ability to speak, listen, and learn to the extent required by a functioning deliberative democracy.This is not hyperbole. By 2026, experts forecast that “synthetic” information may account for ninety-percent of online content. The anticipated deluge of AI-altered content will hinder the ability of speakers to reach their intended audiences as well as audience members to locate speakers. Yet, arbitrary and ahistorical tests developed by courts decades after the founding of the country limit and, arguably, foreclose government efforts to prevent a market failure in the marketplace of ideas.This Article urges a review of the government’s responsibility to maintain a national information exchange. In particular, akin to founding-era congresses expanding the postal network and significantly lowering the postage rate of newspapers, the current Congress should subsidize the creation of “Reality Exchanges” on major social media platforms. These exchanges would only host content unaltered by AI that is also posted by verified individuals or institutions. Such exchanges would align with the historical role of the government in creating and maintaining marketplaces of ideas and avoid some of the major barriers set forth by current First Amendment doctrine.
PubDate: Fri, 24 May 2024 20:15:45 PDT
- Is Garcetti Too Cool for School': Why Garcetti v. Ceballos Should Not
Apply to School Teachers
Authors: Jordan Zaia
Abstract: The First Amendment is implicated by students and teachers every day in public schools. For years, courts followed the test established in Pickering v. Board of Education to analyze free speech claims for public school teachers. However, teachers’ protections were changed in 2006 when the U.S. Supreme Court decided Garcetti v. Ceballos. Since then, the circuits have inconsistently applied this test in cases relating to education. With the circuit split and high-profile cases rising in the federal circuits, the Supreme Court may have an opportunity to resolve the issue.This Note advocates for the Supreme Court to rule that Garcetti does not apply to public school teachers. The Court should treat education differently than other occupations because teachers hold a special role in the development of students around the country, education is the cornerstone of a functioning society, and the education system allows students to develop their own thoughts within the “marketplace of ideas.” This Note highlights how the Court should adopt the Pickering-Connick test to account for all these interests and adequately protect academic freedom.
PubDate: Sat, 27 Apr 2024 19:42:16 PDT
- Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Section 702: The Good, The Bad, and
a Proposal to Make it Less Ugly
Authors: Kevin Burns
Abstract: Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (“FISA”) has been controversial since its inception. Created to allow intelligence collection against targeted foreign persons, electronic surveillance under Section 702 casts a wide net, often capturing communications sent to or by United States persons. Opponents point to the invasion of privacy such collection presents, and to the well-documented abuse and biased use of Section 702 data against U.S. citizens. This Note argues that despite this, Section 702 is a vital tool in the fight against terrorism and drug trafficking and the case against Section 702 is weaker than it appears. This Note offers a minor revision to Section 702 that would address many of the privacy concerns found in Section 702 while preserving the ability of the intelligence agencies to effectively use the collected data.
PubDate: Sat, 27 Apr 2024 19:42:13 PDT
- Business Empire to Patent Umpire: Amazon and the Ascent of Platform Patent
Adjudication
Authors: Shih-wei Chao
Abstract: A trend in patent law is mounting, one which this Article refers to as Platform Patent Adjudication. Amazon’s Patent Evaluation Express (“APEX”) now allows patent owners and sellers to resolve infringement disputes without using courts, and even without traditional alternative dispute resolution mechanisms like arbitration or mediation, but instead entirely within the platform setting. Amazon touts, and many practitioners agree, that its procedure is much less expensive and much quicker than litigating in court. But why is Amazon doing this' And why have other platforms not done this before' This Article takes a step back to examine the conditions and constraints underlying the evolution of Platform Patent Adjudication to illustrate why APEX became as it is. The tale begins with a complicated problem e-commerce platforms face—upon receiving patent owners’ infringement complaints, whether to review and decide them on their merits. Countervailing incentives are at play here, including cost and reputation, but especially legal liability. This Article demonstrates that platforms face liability risk both when they do and do not review complaints, creating a catch-22. APEX is best understood against this backdrop: its structural design circumvents these legal and non-legal incentives, thus making it viable for Amazon to provide. This Article suggests that APEX setting an example signals the beginning of Platform Patent Adjudication; more and more patent disputes can be decided using these private resolution mechanisms administered by e-commerce platforms. If this is an overall positive development, legally prescribed incentives and safe- guards, such as immunity mirroring Section 230 or conditional liability mirroring the DMCA, can encourage even more platforms to provide patent adjudication services. This Article outlines reasons why Platform Patent Adjudication may or may not be a welcome development and contemplates parameters for designing standards or model rules to guide Platform Patent Adjudication in a positive direction.
PubDate: Sat, 27 Apr 2024 19:42:11 PDT
- Misappropriation of Drawing Power (Free-Riding) in Trademarks
Authors: Tony Bortolin
Abstract: This Article advances the cause of action regarding the Misappropriation of Drawing Power (“free-riding”). It is a form of anti-dilution, along the lines of European Union laws regarding parasitism, and is analogous to other laws such as the protection of personality rights. It could also help settle long-standing debates in the trademark field, such as those regarding dilution by blurring, initial-interest confusion, comparative advertising, and whether and how to protect marks beyond the geographical scope of the plaintiff’s sales (such as protecting U.S. marks used internationally).
PubDate: Sat, 27 Apr 2024 19:42:08 PDT
- Melodies Manipulated: Intellectual Property & The Music Industry
Authors: Fordham IPLJ
Abstract: Marilyn Mosby, Founder and Managing Partner of Mahogany Elite Consulting, opened the IPLJ Symposium with her Keynote Address which focused on the cultural, political, and social context surrounding the use of rap lyrics as evidence in criminal prosecutions.The opening panel, “Do You Get Déjà Vu',” comprised of Gary Adelman, Partner, Adelman Matz PC; Linna Chen, Senior Legal Counsel, Litigation & Copyright, Spotify; and Ilene Farkas, Partner, Pryor Cashman, and was moderated by Sarah Matz, Partner, Adelman Matz PC, and Adjunct Professor at Fordham University School of Law. The panel discussed recent copyright cases, specifically Williams v. Gaye (the “Blurred Lines Case”) and Griffin v. Sheeran and deliberated about what these decisions mean for artists involved in copyright infringement suits.The second panel, Robotic Rhapsody, explored the effects of AI-generated music on the music industry and its implications for music copyright law. The panel included Paul Fakler, Partner, Mayer Brown; Alex Mitchell, Co-Founder and CEO of Boomy Music (a Generative AI Music platform); and Marc Ostrow, Senior Counsel, Romano Law. The panel was moderated by Fordham Law Visiting Professor Shlomit Yanisky-Ravid.The last panel of the day, Rhyme & Punishment, circled back to the use of rap lyrics as evidence in criminal trials and the blatantly racist nature of this practice. Panelists included Erik Nielson, University of Richmond Liberal Arts Professor and Department Chair and Co-Author of the award-winning book Rap on Trial: Race, Lyrics, and Guilt in America; Amber Baylor, Columbia Law School Professor and Criminal Defense Clinic Director; Emerson Sykes, Senior Staff Attorney, American Civil Liberties Union (“ACLU”); and Kenan Kurt, Chief of Staff and Counsel for New York State Senator Brad Hoylman-Sigal. The panel was moderated by Fordham Law Professor Bennett Capers.
PubDate: Sat, 27 Apr 2024 19:42:05 PDT
- AI Voice Enters the Copyright Regime: Proposal of a Three-Part Framework
Authors: Prachi Patel
Abstract: We are told that our voice is one of the most powerful tools we have. However, is it just as powerful if it can be replicated' Artificial intelligence has developed to the point where it can create an exact clone of a person’s voice. While there have been many advancements in this field, there are few laws that address artificial intelligence and its use. Artificial intelligence has been used to create artificial voices of well-known figures, both deceased and alive, some without their consent. This creates a need to balance the incentivization of technological development and the protection of an individual’s autonomy over their identity. This Note focuses on the use of artificially generated voice and how current copyright laws can be amended to welcome it into the copyright regime, suggesting a three-part framework that will resolve the tensions raised by the creation and use of artificial voice without silencing it.
PubDate: Fri, 01 Mar 2024 22:08:06 PST
- Forming a More Perfect Union with Blockchains and NFTs: Why the United
States Should Embrace an e-Government
Authors: Alexandria Labaro
Abstract: This Note analyzes blockchain and non-fungible token (“NFT”) technology in the government, emphasizing the benefits of technological integration for improved data security and streamlined bureaucratic processes. It follows the growing popularity of “e-government” practices across the globe and considers factors associated with integrating blockchain and NFT technology in U.S. governmental procedures.
PubDate: Fri, 01 Mar 2024 22:08:04 PST
- Photographic Memory: Expanding “News Deserts” Threaten to Erase the
Visual Record of Contemporary American History
Authors: Frank D. LoMonte et al.
Abstract: As local newspapers close their doors across America, one of the unheralded casualties of their demise may be the loss of the institutional memory of their communities. Photo morgues maintained by newsroom librarians are an invaluable reference for researchers and filmmakers seeking to trace the visual history of localities. While some forward-thinking news organizations have donated their archival photos for preservation, there appears to be no industrywide plan for doing so, meaning that countless thousands of unpublished—but historically valuable—photos are at risk of destruction as cost-cutting newspapers eliminate their libraries, sell off their buildings, or go out of business entirely. While industry-watchers and scholars have long decried the growth of “news deserts,” these accompanying “history deserts” have scarcely been documented or studied. This Article attempts to sound the alarm about the ongoing loss of irreplaceable photographic archives and to point toward a possible solution, drawing on the example of one community—Poughkeepsie, New York—that took affirmative steps toward making sure its news photo archives would survive as a community resource. The Article looks at the copyright concerns that may deter publishers—as well as libraries and historical societies—from displaying and preserving archival materials. Drawing on lessons learned in Poughkeepsie about overcoming legal and institutional obstacles, the Article concludes by suggesting a governmental and industry-wide commitment to halt the rapid disappearance of visual history. The authors suggest that a nationwide rescue could include expanding an existing newspaper preservation grant program offered by the National Endowment for the Humanities to also cover preserving the millions of unpublished photos that help make a community’s visual memory complete.
PubDate: Fri, 01 Mar 2024 22:08:01 PST
- The Jack Daniel’s Dialogues
Authors: Michael Grynberg
Abstract: Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products LLC threatened to upend the balance between trademark rights and expressive freedom. While not going as far as it might have, the opinion limits the ability of defendants to resist trademark claims that target artistic or noncommercial speech.As important as this result is, we should not overlook a fundamental preliminary question. How could a dog chew toy that mocks Jack Daniel’s whiskey be the basis of a viable trademark infringement claim' Answering that question requires discussing deep issues within modern trademark law.These antecedent questions were not directly before the Court, but they nonetheless bubbled up during the Jack Daniel’s oral argument, giving the Justices the opportunity to think out loud about them. Their questions thus provide a window not only on their views about this case but about trademark law in general.Read in conjunction with the final opinion, however, the argument highlights the challenges generalist judges face in ensuring that trademark law serves the interests of consumers and citizens rather than brands and corporations. The oral argument thus tells us a lot about problems in trademark doctrine and foreshadows why the ultimate Jack Daniel’s opinion was unable to resolve them.
PubDate: Fri, 01 Mar 2024 22:07:58 PST
- The Notes You Don’t Play: An Empirical Analysis of the Ninth Circuit’s
Filtration Problem in Music Copyright Cases
Authors: Robert D. Capodilupo
Abstract: The Ninth Circuit’s approach to music copyright cases has failed to provide artists with a clear landscape of the boundaries of copyright protection for creative works. Perhaps most disconcerting is the doctrine’s lack of rigid guidance as to which elements of a composition are protected by copyright. Since the court’s controversial ruling in Williams v. Gaye, which showcased the court’s failure to differentiate between protectable and unprotectable musical elements, the literature has taken a greater interest in analyzing the effects of this muddied doctrine. In their 2019 article, Christopher Jon Sprigman and Samantha Fink Hedrick theorize how the doctrine of the Ninth Circuit creates a “filtration problem” that allows weak copyright claims to pass through the court’s analysis and expose juries to irrelevant, potentially confounding, elements of a song. However, no one has yet quantified the effects of the filtration problem.To fill this gap in the literature, this study conducts original quasi-experimental research to observe the extent to which mock jurors’ assessments of substantial similarity in musical compositions varies based on the elements included in the audio representations of compositions they listen to. Participants were randomly assigned to assess either a high-similarity song-pair or a low-similarity songpair. Within each group, different audio representations of the songs were presented, representing varying levels of filtration. Participants who listened to the most-filtered representation, the piano reduction, when assessing the low-similarity song-pair, were less likely to find similarity between the songs that those who listened to the commercial recordings. Conversely, for the high-similarity song-pair, those who heard the piano reductions were more likely to think the songs were substantially similar compared to those in the recording group.The results of this study suggest that the effectiveness of filtration depends on the relative similarities of the elements filtered and those that remain across audio representations. The piano reduction, as the most-filtered representation, appeared to be a valuable tool for highlighting protectable elements and removing irrelevant factors that could confound jurors’ assessments. Based on these findings, this Article recommends that the Ninth Circuit adopt piano reductions as the standard audio representation for compositions played in music copyright trials. By doing so, the court can mitigate the detrimental effects of the filtration problem, making it more difficult for plaintiffs with compositionally dissimilar songs to succeed on copyright claims while simultaneously strengthening the claims of musician-plaintiffs against genuine instances of copying.
PubDate: Fri, 01 Mar 2024 22:07:56 PST
- Political Neutrality in the Rules of International Sports Federations:
Compatible with Fundamental Freedoms'
Authors: Ilias Bantekas
Abstract: International sports federations celebrate and impose strict political neutrality in their institutional rules. Such neutrality is inconsistent with the individual rights of athletes to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. The contractual basis of such restriction is irrelevant because fundamental rights are constitutionally entrenched and cannot be limited by contract or law, save for if the expression incites to violence, hatred, discrimination or is otherwise inconsistent with criminal law. There is no empirical evidence suggesting that restricting the political expression of influential athletes leads to generalized political or other violence. Instead, it is clear that international sports federations, and particularly their executive organs, are wary of upsetting the disparate political sentiments of their constituent national federations for which human rights are a form of friction due to their quasi-corporate structure. This Article argues that while it is acceptable to curb the inciteful expression of fans and spectators, there is no legal basis to restrict the fundamental rights of individual athletes, including those whose countries have been otherwise sanctioned for egregious human rights violations and blatant wars of aggression. In fact, such athletes may well influence internal developments contrary to the aggressor’s propaganda.
PubDate: Fri, 01 Mar 2024 22:07:53 PST
- Silly Gene Patent is Not My Lover: A Retrospective Analysis of Myriad
Authors: Stephanie Huang
Abstract: The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. established that an isolated fragment of a gene—the basic unit of heredity—is not patent-eligible subject matter while simultaneously holding that complementary DNA (cDNA) of a gene is patent-eligible subject matter. The decision has been controversial and criticized for including two holdings that are internally inconsistent from both scientific and patent law perspectives. But are the short- and long-term criticisms overstated' A decade after Myriad, the various impacts of the case remain relevant, particularly to the biotechnology and genetic testing fields.First, this Note examines whether Myriad was properly decided for isolated genes and cDNA, respectively, under the modern framework for patent-eligible subject matter. Then, this Note argues that the Supreme Court correctly held that isolated human genes are not patent-eligible but wrongly held that cDNA was patent-eligible merely because it is different from its naturally-occurring counterpart. Lastly, this Note explores arguments for and against gene patenting and specifically focuses on the implications of Myriad’s “no gene patenting” holding on subsequent genetic research and diagnostic testing access with the benefit of hindsight.
PubDate: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 19:51:48 PST
- Income Tax (Treasury) Unhappy: Efficacy of Media Campaigns and Tax
Noncompliance
Authors: Limor Riza
Abstract: This Article systematically evaluates the effectiveness of governmental media campaigns and considers whether we should invest in educating society via such campaigns to increase tax compliance, primarily in light of the intrinsic flaw of taxation.Is a radio spot that starts with the sound of scary footsteps approaching you, followed by an announcer who says in a deep and intimidating voice, “we’re closing in on undeclared income,” effective' To answer those questions, this Article proposes and showcases a four-step analysis—the ARMS scheme (Aim, Reason, Media-Methods, Sorting). First, the government’s aim of increased tax compliance is identified and declared (Step I: Aim). Second, because the discrepancy between tax payments and government expenditures can lead taxpayers to evade payment, various reasons and motivations for evading tax are explored, including those of rational and irrational taxpayers with a particular focus on the unrequited motive (Step II: Reason). The unrequited motive refers to the motive to avoid paying taxes because tax payments do not directly correlate to the return provided by the government back to the taxpayer. Third, various types of media campaigns (deterrence, boasting, damage, and assistance campaigns) utilized to increase tax compliance are systematically analyzed (Step III: Media-Methods). Finally, the types of compulsory payments involved are then sorted (Step IV: Sorting).By using this ARMS scheme, this Article shows that although there is a single aim—tax compliance—there is no single modus operandi to mitigate tax evasion via media campaigns given their various forms and evasion motives. In general, the tax literature so far has examined the effectiveness of media campaigns without making distinctions based on evasion motives. This Article argues that campaigns can only be effective if those motives are taken into consideration in light of the type of media campaign used. This Article classifies varying media campaigns into categories of deterrence, boasting, damage, or assistance types. Moreover, the type of compulsory payment is also relevant to the analysis.This Article concludes that, given these requirements, the only media campaign type that may be effective for all rational evader types is deterrence. Nevertheless, boasting and damage campaigns can affect a certain group of rational evaders: those who also take the unrequited nature of taxation into consideration. Additionally, most media campaign types—primarily boasting and damage (and to some extent also deterrence)—are effective means to address the unrequited motive. To highlight the correlation between tax compliance and the public good, taxpayers need to be informed on how their taxes are used. Governments should implement mechanisms to effectively communicate with those taxpayers in line with an ideal of “no taxation without communication.” Media campaigns can be that mechanism to deliver such information to overcome tax non-compliance.
PubDate: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 19:51:46 PST
- Are ChatGPT and Other Similar Systems the Modern Lernaean Hydras of
AI'
Authors: Dimitrios Ioannidis; Esq. et al.
Abstract: The rise of Generative Artificial Intelligence systems (“AI systems”) has created unprecedented social engagement. AI code generation systems provide responses (output) to questions or requests by accessing the vast library of open-source code created by developers over the past few decades. However, they do so by allegedly stealing the open-source code stored in virtual libraries, known as repositories. This Article focuses on how this happens and whether there is a solution that protects innovation and avoids years of litigation. We also touch upon the array of issues raised by the relationship between AI and copyright. Looking ahead, we propose the following: (a) immediate changes to the licenses for open-source code created by developers that will limit access and/or use of any open-source code to humans only; (b) we suggest revisions to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (“MIT”) license so that AI systems are required to procure appropriate licenses from open-source code developers, which we believe will harmonize standards and build social consensus for the benefit of all of humanity, rather than promote profit-driven centers of innovation; (c) we call for urgent legislative action to protect the future of AI systems while also promoting innovation; and (d) we propose a shift in the burden of proof to AI systems in obfuscation cases.
PubDate: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 19:51:44 PST
|
Open Access journal
