Is it learning or… stealing? The debate over royalties, the future of culture and the limits of automation
The debate over royalties for training AI models on others’ creative works is about more than money. On one hand, there’s the idea of open access to knowledge and the tradition of fair use. On the other, there’s the need to protect human creative labor in a world of mass, automated data extraction.
When an AI model is trained on your creative work, is it more like a fan reading your book to become a better writer, or more like a company using your recording without asking for permission?
This comparison defines the axis of the entire debate — one that resonated strongly during Generative Revolution Day, an event designed to raise bold questions and seek the most plausible answers in a world increasingly shaped by artificial intelligence. It came to the forefront in a panel discussion titled: “Should artists and authors be receiving royalties for AI models training?”.
Share
You might be interested in
-
Google’s on a roll. Deep Research is now on Gemini 3 Pro
Google is unveiling a new version of Deep Research, built on Gemini 3 Pro. The tool is designed to automate complex analytical tasks, and launching it the same day as the GPT-5.2…
-
Bielik Summit ’25: The rising ambitions of the Polish LLM
InPost as the patron of Bielik, the launch of Bielik 3.0, and a packed room of people eager to discuss real AI implementations and challenges. The Polish model demonstrates that Europe’s AI…
-
Business vs. Technology. Does AI help us speak the same language?
Engineers talk about models and data, while business folks discuss risk, costs and outcomes. Does AI help bridge communication gaps in organizations? What skills are essential today to develop AI-based solutions?
-
AI in medicine – global models, local challenges
AI development is changing the way we diagnose, treat and conduct clinical research. How should we implement these solutions while prioritizing patients?
