Copyfair is the new Copyleft

In the digital age, intellectual property laws have become increasingly important for creators, artists, and innovators to protect their work from unauthorized use and exploitation. For decades, copyright has been the cornerstone of IP law, granting exclusive rights to creators over their original works. However, with the rise of the internet, social media, and collaborative cultures, a new approach to intellectual property management has emerged: copyleft.

Copyleft facilitates the use and re-use of copyrighted works by ensuring that anyone has the right to reproduce, distribute, and modify these works, without imposing conditions on subsequent creators other than requiring that derivative works be licensed under the same terms as the original.

While copyleft has become a widely recognized and established practice in the world of intellectual property, copyfair is emerging as a new approach to copyright licensing that’s gaining traction, especially among advocates for more equitable systems. Copyfair is a more flexible and pragmatic solution for creators seeking to share their work while still maintaining some control over the remuneration expected by different categories of stakeholders.

In this post, we’ll explore why, in specific contexts where commercial interests are at stake, copyfair might be considered more appropriate than copyleft, in light of its advantages in fostering creativity, promoting collaboration, and supporting fairness and transparency in the digital age.

1. The Limitations of Copyright

While Copyright has been a cornerstone of intellectual property law, instrumental in protecting creators’ rights, it’s not without its drawbacks, and its limitations have become increasingly evident in the digital age. The traditional copyright model is often criticized for:

1. Over-protectiveness: The traditional copyright model can be overly protective, stifling innovation and creativity by limiting access to knowledge and ideas. This is particularly problematic for fields like science and education, where sharing research and findings is essential for progress.

2. Limited fair use: The fair use doctrine, intended to allow limited uses without permission, has been criticized for being ambiguous and difficult to navigate. This can lead to uncertainty for creators, who may be unsure whether their intended use falls within the bounds of fair use, potentially leading to legal disputes and financial losses. Moreover, the doctrine’s subjective nature means that judges’ interpretations can vary, leading to inconsistent outcomes.

3. Expensive litigation: Enforcing copyright infringement claims often requires significant legal and financial resources, making it inaccessible to many creators. This can lead to a disproportionate advantage for those with greater economic power, stifling the creative potential of marginalized or underfunded artists, writers, musicians, and innovators.

4. Outdated regulation: Copyright laws have evolved slowly, failing to keep pace with technological advancements. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) in the U.S. and the InfoSoc Directive in Europe are just a few examples of laws that were enacted to adapt copyright to the digital environment, way before the widespread adoption of artificial intelligence and generative AI in particular.

5. Lack of global harmonization: Copyright laws vary significantly across countries, creating confusion and complexity for creators seeking to share their work globally. This can lead to unintended consequences, such as unwittingly infringing on rights in one jurisdiction while trying to protect them in another.

6. Inequitable distribution of benefits: The current copyright system often favors large corporations over individual creators, perpetuating an imbalance that stifles innovation and creativity.

2. The Copyleft Advantage

Copyleft is an approach to copyright licensing that aims to promote sharing, collaboration, and

creativity by combining the principles of copyright law with those of open-source software development. It was pioneered by Richard Stallman, founder of the Free Software Foundation (FSF), as a way to ensure that free software remains free for all users. Copyleft licenses, such as the GNU General Public License (GPL) and the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, require that any derivative works or modifications be distributed under the same terms and conditions as the original work.

Some argue that copyleft is a more flexible and pragmatic solution for creators seeking to share their work in the digital environment. By eliminating the default restrictions on reproduction, distribution, and adaptation, copyleft encourages innovation, collaboration, and remixing, as people are free to adapt the original work without fear of being bound by overly restrictive terms. At the same time, the obligation to release any modified work under the same licensing terms ensures that the creative contributions of others are also made freely available to the community, fostering a culture of openness and collaboration. As a result, copyleft licenses offer several advantages over traditional copyright licensing models:

1. More creativity: Copyleft’s permissive licenses make it easier for people to use and build upon existing work, without having to obtain permission. For instance, the open-source operating system Linux was built upon the GNU General Public License (GPL), allowing developers to modify and improve the code without restriction. Similarly, the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license has enabled artists like musicians, writers, and photographers to share their work while encouraging others to build upon it.

2. Collaborative culture: By encouraging sharing and collaboration, Copyleft fosters a community-driven approach that benefits everyone involved. Copyleft also fosters a culture of openness and cooperation, as people are obliged to share their own adaptations and creations with others. For example, Wikipedia’s free content policy is based on the copyleft principle, allowing anyone to access, edit, and contribute to the vast repository of knowledge without copyright restrictions. The OpenStreetMap project uses a copyleft license, enabling contributors to create and share geographic data, fostering a collaborative environment where users can build upon each other’s work.

3. Innovative solutions: The open-source nature of copyleft allows for rapid iteration and development of new ideas, leading to innovative solutions and services. Users are empowered to experiment and innovate, knowing they have the freedom to modify or build upon the original work. For example, the Apache Software Foundation’s open-source approach has led to the development of innovative software applications like the Hadoop big data processing platform and the Cassandra NoSQL database. Likewise, the Open-source hardware movement, led by organizations like the Open Source Hardware Association (OSH), promotes sharing and collaboration in the design and development of new electronic devices, such as smartphones and laptops.

4. Promoting access and reciprocity: By making creative work freely available for use and reuse, copyleft encourages wider adoption of creative works, breaking down barriers to access and participation. Most importantly, the “share-alike” principle of copyleft ensures that those who benefit from a project or work also contribute back to the community, fostering a sense of fairness and reciprocity.

By leveraging these benefits, Copyleft licenses have become an essential part of the digital landscape, empowering creators and innovators to share their work while promoting collaboration and progress.

3. The Limitations of Copyleft

While Copyleft has been instrumental in promoting open-source collaboration and innovation, it also raises concerns about the potential for exploitation or misappropriation. In particular, copyleft faces several limitations that can hinder creators’ ability to ensure economic rewards for their intellectual labor.

1. Lack of financial incentives: The permissive nature of copyleft licenses means that creators may not receive direct financial compensation for their work. This can be a significant challenge for artists, writers, musicians, and other creatives who rely on their work as a primary source of income.

2. Difficulty in tracking and enforcing rights: When creative works are shared under copyleft licenses, it can become challenging to track the usage and modifications made to the original work. This lack of transparency can make it difficult for creators to enforce their rights and protect their intellectual property.

3. Inequitable distribution of benefits: The “share-alike” principle of copyleft licenses often favors those who build upon existing work, potentially creating an imbalance in the distribution of benefits. Creators may struggle to receive fair compensation for their original contributions, as the value of their work is diluted by subsequent modifications and derivative works.

4. Inadequate support for commercial applications: While copyleft has facilitated the development of open-source software and other creative works, it may not be well-suited for commercial applications that require specific intellectual property protections. This can create challenges for creators seeking to monetize their work through licensing agreements or direct sales.

Thus, creators must carefully consider the trade-offs between permissive licensing and protecting their own commercial interests. Ultimately, the success of copyleft depends on its ability to strike a balance between encouraging creative freedom and maintaining a reasonable level of economic rewards for content creators.

By acknowledging these limitations, at Alien we have been working towards creating a more equitable and inclusive licensing mechanism that supports artistic expression, encourages collaboration, and promotes fairness and equitable redistribution of profits in various fields.

4. The Copyfair approach

Copyfair is a novel approach to copyright licensing that builds upon the principles of open source but introduces an additional restriction: specific categories of actors (e.g. commercial users) must pay royalties for the profits they make through the commercial exploitation of a work. Hence, while anyone can use and modify the work without restrictions under the open source principles, commercial use — although they do not require permission — must, in specific circumstances, be accompanied with the payment of royalties to the original creator. This adds an economic layer to the traditional open-source approach, recognizing that extensive investments are required for certain types of creative work, such as generative AI models.

Thus, while copyleft focuses on sharing and collaboration, copyfair introduces a new dimension by requiring particular categories of users to pay royalties in the case of commercial exploitation. The goal is to promote innovation by allowing small players to access and build upon existing works for free, encouraging them to succeed. However, if they do eventually succeed, it is considered fair that they contribute back to the original creators, fostering a culture of cooperation and equitable redistribution. By focusing on equitable principles and reciprocity, copyfair aims to:

1. Promote fairness and reciprocity: The principles of fairness and reciprocity are at the heart of copyfair, ensuring that successful commercial uses of licensed content benefit all stakeholders involved. By requiring that commercially successful actors redistribute part of their profits to the content creator, copyfair guarantees that commercial exploitations are done in the best interests of all stakeholders, rather than just benefiting a select few.

2. Foster collaboration and trust: By ensuring that successful commercial uses of the work will potentially become a source of profits for the original creator, copyfair encourages collaboration in settings where parties would otherwise regard themselves as competitors. Besides, the open nature of the copyfair licensing model promotes accountability and trust among creators, developers, and users.

3. Modular choices: Copyleft and Copyfair licenses can be combined to create new types of licenses that favor cooperation and equitable redistribution. For instance, one could create a license that combines the principles of copyleft (allowing modification under similar terms) with those of copyfair (requiring commercial users to contribute back to the original creators). This approach would promote collaboration while ensuring fair compensation for creators.

5. The importance of Copyfair in Generative AI

Generative AI models, which have the ability to create novel content such as images, music, or text, require extensive investments to develop. These models are often trained on large datasets and utilize complex algorithms, making them computationally expensive to produce.

Copyfair licensing becomes increasingly necessary in the digital era, particularly with the advent of generative AI. Without a mechanism to recoup these investments, creators may choose to keep their models closed-source, limiting their potential impact and stifling innovation. By adopting Copyfair, actors in the generative AI space can promote collaboration, fairness, and transparency, ultimately driving progress in this emerging field.

By using a Copyfair license, generative AI model developers can share their work openly while ensuring that specific categories of users, e.g. commercial users, must contribute back to the original creators. This approach allows for widespread adoption of these models while ensuring that the model creators who invested significant resources receive fair compensation.

Several actors in the generative AI space have already adopted Copyfair licensing, recognizing its importance in promoting innovation and collaboration. For instance:

Conclusion

As the digital landscape continues to evolve, the debate around copyright, Copyleft, and Copyfair will undoubtedly intensify. Creators, innovators, and policymakers must navigate these complexities to find innovative solutions that support artistic expression, encourage collaboration, and protect intellectual property rights in the era of digital creativity.

While copyright remains an essential tool for protecting creators’ rights, copyleft offers a more collaborative, commons-based and community-driven approach to intellectual property management. Indeed, permissive licensing schemes like Open source software and Creative Commons licenses eliminates some of the restrictions implemented by default under copyright law in order to promote the dissemination and the reuse of copyrighted content like software or artistic works. To the extent that they are grounded on copyright law, these licenses are entirely consistent with international legal frameworks (such as the Berne Convention) and are thus enforceable across borders like any other copyright license. Yet, despite encouraging greater collaboration and wider dissemination of content, the copyleft approach does not guarantee substantial economic returns to those who invested the money, time and resources in developing valuable content.

As the digital landscape continues to evolve, especially with the advent of generative AI, it is essential to reevaluate the limitations of both copyright and copyleft, and explore alternative approaches that better serve the needs of creators, innovators, and society as a whole. Copyfair licenses are intended to foster a more fair, equitable and sustainable environment that supports fairness, innovation, and collaboration by ensuring fair compensation and recognition for artists and creators — in ways that remain fully consistent with copyright law and international norms.

By embracing these principles, copyfair has the potential to revolutionize the way we approach copyright licensing in the digital age, and in particular in the age of generative AI. Stay tuned as we are currently in the process of drafting a new copyfair license that is specifically geared for generative AI, and which promises to set new standards for fairness and innovation in copyright licensing.