Apple Explores AI Deals With News Publishers

Apple is in negotiations with major news and publishing organizations (source paywalled; alternative source), "seeking permission to use their material in the company's development of generative artificial intelligence systems," reports the New York Times. From the report: The technology giant has floated multiyear deals worth at least $50 million to license the archives of news articles [...]. The news organizations contacted by Apple include Conde Nast, publisher of Vogue and The New Yorker; NBC News; and IAC, which owns People, The Daily Beast and Better Homes and Gardens. The negotiations mark one of the earliest examples of how Apple is trying to catch up to rivals in the race to develop generative A.I., which allows computers to create images and chat like a human. [...]

Some of the publishers contacted by Apple were lukewarm on the overture. After years of on-again-off-again commercial deals with tech companies like Meta, the owner of Facebook, publishers have grown wary of jumping into business with Silicon Valley. Several publishing executives were concerned that Apple's terms were too expansive, according to three people familiar with the negotiations. The initial pitch covered broad licensing of publishers' archives of published content, with publishers potentially on the hook for any legal liabilities that could stem from Apple's use of their content.

Apple was also vague about how it intended to apply generative A.I. to the news industry, the people said, a potential competitive risk given Apple's substantial audience for news on its devices. Still, some news executives were optimistic that Apple's approach might eventually lead to a meaningful partnership. Two people familiar with the discussions struck a positive note on the long-term prospects of a deal, contrasting Apple's approach of asking for permission with behavior from other artificial intelligence-enabled companies, which have been accused of seeking licensing deals with news organizations after they had already used their content to train generative models. Further reading: Apple's AI Research Signals Ambition To Catch Up With Big Tech Rivals

Can’t imagine why old media

[hdyoung]

Would be suspicious of the faangs. I dont consider myself a SV hater, but there’s no arguing that those companies have springboarded on the more traditional media whenever they could without paying a dime. You can’t blame them. That’s business. But I totally understand why the New Yorker would want to lock it’s content behind paywalls, rather than sell a one-time access to Apple for 50 million, so they can train an AI that’ll net billions. Apple can make the offer, and it can b

Re:

[NomDeAlias]

Data scraping is certainly legal if they publicly publish it and then have some unread TOS on a different page that was never agreed to. The paywall though will come with a TOS that has to be agreed to when purchasing the subscription. Publishers would really be dropping the ball if their TOS weren't updated this year to prohibit scraping for AI training under a standard consumer subscription.

Re: Can’t imagine why old media

[hdyoung]

AFAIK it was determined long ago that the TOS is a gentlemans agreement between an individual and the company, with no government involvement and with basically no consequences in court. Violate the TOS and the consequence is your account can be cancelled. Oh nooeessssss.

Hmm...

[T-RayTombstone]

"The news organizations contacted by Apple include Conde Nast, publisher of Vogue and The New Yorker; NBC News; and IAC, which owns People, ..." They really should have included the word 'Magazine' after that last entry. There's something dystopic about the phrase "IAC, which owns People."