AI Has a Copyright Problem – Do Decentralized Networks Have a Solution?

AI is like a precocious kid. It learns from the world around it, absorbing data, processing it, and trying to make sense of it all. Kids learn from an array of media – books; pictures; voices; TV shows; the internet – and so does AI. Like a toddler, it’s hungry for knowledge and capable of learning astonishingly fast.

But while kids are free to draw cues from anything and everything they can sense, AI doesn’t have that luxury. Or at least it shouldn’t. In theory, AIs should only be trained on copyright-free data. In practice, the data they are fed is often anything but. As multiple cases of IP infringement have shown, AI has a bad habit of copying others’ homework – and then reproducing it as its own.

As AIs proliferate and become hungrier for raw data, it’s a problem that’s become pronounced. On the one hand, we want to live in a world where AI innovation flourishes and everyone benefits from the most transformative technology since the internet. But at the same time, it’s only fair that content creators and license holders should be compensated for their work – regardless of whether it’s a human or a machine repurposing it.

Decentralized networks, built upon core web3 principles of transparency and open access, promise a more equitable solution for AI training data in which all participants benefit. But can it truly make good on this promise and foster a fairer AI industry in which copyright claims are finally laid to rest?

Centralized AI Can’t Stop Copying

The core of the controversy lies in how generative AI models acquire their knowledge. Most large-scale models are trained on datasets scraped from the internet, often without explicit permission from creators. While AI companies argue this constitutes fair use, many publishers, artists, and writers disagree, leading to a wave of legal actions and public outcry.

The issue isn’t limited to copyright infringement; it’s also about control. When a handful of corporations dictate the rules for data usage and profit from models trained on that data, the system inherently lacks accountability. Moreover, creators have little recourse to track, manage, or receive remuneration for the use of their intellectual property.

The emergence of ChatGPT and similar generative models seemed a decisive victory for artificial intelligence until the question of “fair use” reared its head. Publishers and artists worldwide have accused the giant AI labs of training models on copyrighted works without explicit permission. The debate has evolved from a murmur into a global conversation about who owns the data behind tomorrow’s AI.

ChatGPT’s training data appears to have included copyrighted content, from books to journalistic articles. Although the company claims fair use, critics are unconvinced. If we rely on large AI labs to self-govern – and if their behind-the-scenes operations remain opaque – can we really ensure that the rights of creators are respected?

While conventional setups depend on an AI lab’s internal ethics committees or licensing deals to determine what data can or can’t be used, decentralized AI promises a more transparent framework. Networks of contributors, node operators, and smaller “AI hubs” collectively decide on the data intake, model architecture, and usage rights. In other words, no single entity dictates which copyrighted works are fair game. At least that’s the theory. But what does this vision look like in practice?

Decentralized AI in Action

Unlike centralized models, where data collection and model training are controlled by a single entity, decentralized AI distributes these responsibilities across a network. This setup allows for transparent governance of data sources, enabling creators to opt in or out of their work being used for training.

Through smart contracts and tokenization, decentralized systems can ensure that all contributors are fairly compensated. More importantly, this approach provides an immutable audit trail, making it possible to verify whether datasets comply with legal and ethical standards.

SingularityNET, an incubator for AI services, exemplifies how decentralization can democratize AI development. The platform enables developers to access AI tools while ensuring that contributors are rewarded fairly, and is overseeing marketplaces spanning such verticals as DeFi, Robotics, Biotech and Longevity, Gaming and Media, Arts and Entertainment (Music), and Enterprise-level AI.

It’s also a key player in ASI (Artificial Superintelligence Initiative), focusing on domain-specific AI models. These models, tailored for industries like robotics or healthcare, rely on curated datasets where consent and compliance can be rigorously managed. ASI’s blueprint involves transparent data curation and model governance, so that each domain-specific AI has a trackable origin for its training data.

ASI’s emphasis on domain specificity makes it particularly suited to navigating copyright complexities. By focusing on targeted datasets for niche applications, ASI avoids the pitfalls of large-scale scraping while maintaining the robustness needed for high-performance AI. This approach aligns with the broader goal of decentralized AI: to ensure that all stakeholders – creators, users, and developers – benefit from the upside to the industry’s growth.

SingularityNET and ASI are designed to place decisions about data usage and model tuning in the hands of a distributed collective rather than a single corporate entity. Think of it as a strategic pivot from “trust us, we’ll figure it out” to “let’s figure it out together in a publicly accountable way.”

Why Decentralized AI Matters

By distributing the training and validation process across multiple contributors, decentralized networks can implement clear, community-driven checks and balances on the data. Every piece of content can be traced, verified, or even excluded if it raises concerns. Intellectual property owners have a chance to opt in or out and node operators can enforce consensus-based rules. This doesn’t completely eliminate complexity – copyright law remains labyrinthine – but it does embed transparency at the network’s core.

This growing wave of decentralized AI aims to solve more than just copyright issues: it targets the entire lifecycle of an AI system, from data ingestion to onchain governance. The idea is that any content used to train a model is traceable back to its source, allowing for fair licensing agreements or appropriate compensation. Essentially, no giant aggregator gets to hide behind fair use if the underlying community decides the data belongs off-limits.

In a climate fraught with legal uncertainties and big-tech whistleblower revelations, decentralized AI might just be the remedy. If the industry wants to keep innovating without alienating or harming creative communities, forging a more open path is vital. Meeting the needs of tomorrow’s AI doesn’t have to mean overstepping the bounds of copyright. Instead, it can harness the best of distributed decision-making and web3 technology, charting a fairer, more inclusive future for creators, developers, and AI users alike.

By placing control back into the hands of creators and communities, decentralized AI has the potential to redefine how we think about ownership and data in the age of artificial intelligence.

Source