OpenAI and Microsoft are facing class action lawsuits for alleged violations of privacy and copyright laws. Clarkson founder and managing partner Ryan Clarkson spoke to Yahoo Finance Live about the lawsuit against the tech company.
video transcript
Rachel Akufo: Now, in the last year or so, generative AI has taken the world by storm, becoming the most desired innovation for businesses and people. Now, according to a new McKinsey report, generative AI could add costs worth $2.6 trillion to $4.4 trillion in various industries. And while 73% of global consumers trust AI-generated content, according to a Capgemini Institute study, there are still many fears about AI and a lack of understanding about the technology itself. There are many things.
Perhaps the question that best represents the overall concern is whether AI violates privacy rights and intellectual property. The next guest argues that generative AI definitely does. Let’s invite Clarkson founder and managing partner Ryan Clarkson to discuss his company’s latest lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft. Thank you for joining us this morning. So first analyze your claims against OpenAI.
Ryan Clarkson: First, I would like to say that AI poses one of the greatest opportunities and greatest challenges in human history. This is a revolutionary technology that has many benefits for the world, from curing disease to solving climate change, but we need to do it responsibly.
OpenAI and Microsoft launched an “AI arms race” and exposed this untested technology to the world without proper safeguards. All major AI researchers like the godfather of AI, Dr. Jeffrey Hinton, agree that we should continue down this path. , we are endangering humanity in both the long and short term, and the risks are already becoming apparent every day.
Lies and deepfakes, widespread fraud, invasion of privacy, and even widespread unemployment. Just look at OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and former Microsoft CEO Bill Gates, both of whom signed an open letter to the effect that the dangers AI poses are similar to global pandemics and other societal-scale risks like nuclear power. It expresses the belief that it is necessary to consider them together. war.
This cannot be misunderstood. Our lawsuit, therefore, seeks to ensure that public safety, privacy, and property rights remain untested, unproven until they are implemented using systems of human ethics and human values. seek a commercial access and development freeze on technologies that are not
Rachel Akufo: So Ryan, but how hard a fight will it be? You’re right, a lot of it is unproven technology. There is not much precedent for this, and the regulators themselves have not drawn any conclusions. Would a class action lawsuit be the best way to resolve this?
Ryan Clarkson: Large-scale identity theft is not a legitimate business model. And that’s exactly what these companies have done. Because they steal the personal information of hundreds of millions of Americans, including children of all ages, creative works, professional works, and photographs, all fed into unpredictable and dangerous AI models. has been used for No one consented to having their information used in such a manner, and no one was given the opportunity to opt out.
Governments are now considering common sense regulation in both the legislative and executive branches. However, they weren’t designed that way, so they won’t go as fast as this technology. Accordingly, we intend to ask the Court to apply these unprecedented facts and circumstances to established property and privacy laws.
Rachel Akufo: And what do you think this will free up for you? This is because you may have also obtained scraped data without your knowledge. What kind of snowball effect would this have?
Ryan Clarkson: Well, I think it can be a big snowball effect. We’ve been duped by big tech companies into believing Sophie’s Choice exists. We participate online and participate in Internet transactions and communications, but we waive all privacy and property rights or simply do not engage in Internet activity. It’s the wrong choice. We do not give up our privacy or property rights just because we participate in human life on the Internet.
Rachel Akufo: With that in mind, you have pointed out to us that this is not an adversarial relationship with AI. Clearly, it could have a lot of potential benefits here. But what is the actual outcome you want in this class action lawsuit?
Ryan Clarkson: Well, we would like to cooperate on this issue. People on all sides of the issue want common sense safety protocols implemented in this technology across government, industry and non-profits. And this is an opportunity for the general public to make their voices heard. And so far, their response has been overwhelmingly positive.
We have heard from concerned citizens, other potential group members, and whistleblowers who have come forward to share their stories. And to our viewers, Rachel, I invite you to join us in visiting .AI to learn more, take action, and join our cause and cause.
Rachel Akufo: But from a damages point of view, what kind of claim is the client seeking?
Ryan Clarkson: Our information is valuable and ours. Look no further than the statistics you presented earlier in this segment on how much money is being invested in AI in the economy. Notice how young company OpenAI is already valued at nearly $30 billion. Notice how Microsoft’s market capitalization has increased by hundreds of billions of dollars since the announcement of its partnership with OpenAI.
Big data, and our personal information, is big business and valuable. And what we want is compensation for everyone whose personal information has been stolen to train these AI models. It’s worthless without an AI model.
Rachel Akufo: Certainly, when it comes to generative AI, good data, quality data is key. Special thanks to Ryan Clarkson, Founder and Managing Partner of Clarkson. We will follow up on that lawsuit. Thank you for joining us this morning.
