In a significant move, Google has declared its commitment to protect users of its generative AI systems on Google Cloud and Workspace platforms from potential intellectual property violation claims. This announcement aligns with similar initiatives by Microsoft and Adobe, but Google distinguishes itself by providing comprehensive coverage for both the use of copyrighted works in training AI and the output generated by these systems.
Google’s indemnity strategy extends to a variety of products, offering users assurance against third-party intellectual property claims, including copyright challenges. Specifically, this policy encompasses software such as the Vertex AI development platform and Duet AI system, integral to generating text and images within Google Workspace and Cloud programs. Notably, the announcement does not explicitly include Bard, Google’s renowned generative AI chatbot.
The indemnification approach is two-fold, constituting an industry-first according to Google. The first facet addresses Google’s use of training data, with the tech giant assuming responsibility for potential legal risks associated with claims that the use of training data in its generative models infringes on third-party intellectual property rights. This is a pivotal point, given the ongoing debate over the fair use of data scraped from the Internet for AI training.
The second aspect pertains to the generated output of these AI systems. Google pledges to indemnify users against claims that content created by the AI systems, in response to user prompts or inputs, violates a third party’s intellectual property rights. However, Google’s offer of indemnity comes with a crucial limitation—it will not apply if users intentionally create or use generated output to infringe the rights of others.
This move by Google comes amidst a backdrop of increasing legal scrutiny on generative AI technology, leading to lawsuits from writers, illustrators, and other copyright owners. While companies like Google have been investing heavily in generative AI, they have also found themselves as primary targets of lawsuits surrounding this technology. It’s noteworthy that, so far, legal actions have primarily targeted the companies behind AI systems, rather than individual users.
As generative AI continues to evolve, Google’s proactive stance in shielding users within defined limits reflects the ongoing efforts to balance innovation with ethical and legal considerations in the dynamic landscape of artificial intelligence.
