Any tool can be wielded for right or wrong ....new technolog� has consistently had ripple effects in the workplace and life.
that data to what it spits back out (using algorithms). Hence, showing substantial similarity to any specific copyright- protected work will almost always fail. Nonetheless, everything that survives legal scrutiny is not always ethical. Case in point! What’s more, AI is not always accurate. You may have seen news reports of the attorneys who submitted AI-generated research in their briefs to a New York District Court. They were unaware that AI had concocted
fictitious cases upon which the lawyers based their argument, and they did not double check the sources. Ruh Roh! The judge fined and chastised them with “Technological advances are commonplace and there is nothing inherently improper about using a reliable artificial intelligence tool for assistance but existing rules impose a gatekeeping role on attorneys to ensure the accuracy of their filings.” As speakers, facilitators, trainers, coaches, and other speaking
create (i.e., for their original works). You may have created the chatbot query, but you did not create the chatbot result. It is, in fact, a genuine imitation! To say that your claim of resultant verbiage as yours equates copyright infringement may not hold water, but it will always be “copying.” Proving copyright infringement requires substantial similarity. AI does indeed draw from third-party material, but it assembles data from a multitude of sources, and analyzes and transforms
40
Speaker Life Magazine
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online