A. P. HowellSFWA's statement on AI/ML:
https://www.sfwa.org/2023/06/13/current-statement-on-ai-ml-use/
My two cents (as a member and volunteer but not part of the Board):
I think this is a good start. It lays out some of the complexities of the issue (e.g. terminology, lack of transparency) that make it challenging to make a statement that is definitive and pithy. It also approaches the issue from the perspective appropriate for the organization (i.e. how authorship and income are impacted).
Since this is only a start, I wish this particular statement had come out earlier this year, when generated content became more prevalent. I wish the terms of the discussion had been set then, so that now we could be a little farther along. I also wish the there had been a nod to the current legal landscape (e.g. decisions that machine-generated content is not copyrightable) but IANAL and I assume lawyers were involved in the drafting of the document.
Since this is only a start, I'm also eager to see future statements. The sort of things I'd like to see addressed include:
1. A discussion of terminology, possibly including a glossary for how SFWA defines/categorizes different types of technology.
2. Discussion of how AI/LLM/etc. will impact membership eligibility. (On the birdsite, Neil Clarke raised the point that, since membership is now earnings-based, there are no longer "qualifying markets.")
1. A discussion of terminology, possibly including a glossary for how SFWA defines/categorizes different types of technology.
2. Discussion of how AI/LLM/etc. will impact membership eligibility. (On the birdsite, Neil Clarke raised the point that, since membership is now earnings-based, there are no longer "qualifying markets.")
3. How AI/LLM/etc. issues will be addressed by SFWA resources and projects (e.g. Writer Beware, Griefcom).
This statement provides hints of how policies and future statements may develop, and I'm encouraged by the mention of an Emerging Technology Committee.