AI Policy Event Highlights Gaps in Intellectual Property Protection

This trending technology is on a steep ascent in more ways than one. From a legislation point of view, the focus is centralization at the federal level. However right now, most AI policies are stalled at the state level. Whether you're rooting for this trailblazer depends on one question: Are you optimistic or pessimistic?

Connecting with a local politician about decentralized technology

On Thursday, May 29, wearing a slicked-back bun and a citrine and gold necklace, I attended DeSci NYC's "AI and Government: A Conversation with State Assembly Member Alex Bores" event at Saint Restaurant Bar and Speakeasy in the East Village.

DeSci-powered sleep experiment Stadium Science and the Solana Foundation host free monthly events for curious scientists and tech enthusiasts in the tri-state area. This monthly series called DeSci NYC offers a third space for tech-savvy science enthusiasts to learn, connect, and yap. Some past DeSci NYC event crowd favorites include the one with longevity expert Bryan Johnson, “Dating and Data Science: What AI learned after 2,961 First Dates,” and “Ketamine, Brainwide Recording and the Neurobiology of Dissociation with Dr. Isaac V Kauvar.”

After a brief introduction from DeSci NYC's organizer and Science Stadium founder Michael Fischer, the New York State Assembly Member New York City’s 73rd District presented his team's current projects focusing on proactive AI legislation. The politician fielded questions and comments about everything from how he develops and pitches his AI policies and guardrails to AI and nuclear fission comparisons, the robot apocalypse, and classified conversations happening behind closed doors. He commented on every question but the one I wanted answered.

Bores had the answer to most questions because of experience and expertise in the field. In fact, he is the only elected New York Democratic Party official at any level with a degree in computer science. In a world where people like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Linda McMahon exist, this kind of science credibility in government at any level is rare.

Photo credit: DeSci NYC 

The Bores team's policy accomplishments continue to grow and shape a centralized AI and advanced technology legislative landscape. They ask questions like: Is the policy optimistic or pessimistic about the AI trending topic at hand? From there, they begin categorizing and writing policies like the New York Artificial Intelligence Consumer Protection Act (A00768).

Past legislative accomplishments credited to Assembly Member Bores include passing a bill ensuring that employees' inventions remain their own intellectual property, hitting telemarketers with higher fines for disturbing your peace, and protecting susceptible spam caller targets and victims.

The intellectual New York state Assembly member didn't answer an intellectual property question

It seems most of the crowd was interested in the societal consequences of AI, its role in cybersecurity, and concerns regarding the technology's sentience and vulnerabilities. Like, we get it — you've watched "I, Robot."

While all of that was interesting to learn about, my main objective was to find out more about the intersection of intellectual property, ownership, generative AI and legislature.

In my line of work, writers are under more threat of plagiarism and ingenuity accusations, witch trials and rushed judgment than ever before as AI starts absorbing all the online data available.

I have personally experienced these stressors with my clients within the past year. Conversation after conversation, I've had to defend my integrity, heart and soul against the cold anxiety AI causes my clients. Several clients of mine run my submitted deliverables through generative AI scanners like Originality.ai. 

And each time I insert any content into the scanner, I consensually commit insert my musings, ideas, drafts, and ready-to-publish copies into a mass database. As a result, I allow this data to have the potential to be used against me. That’s because all of these databases are managed differently depending on the common sense and ethics of the private leaders in this sector. 

So, how is the government going to protect this intellectual property — and professional integrity — from these generative AI threats and the dark sides of the human soul?

Intertextuality is one thing, but AI collecting and storing my unpublished text string data during ideation and brainstorming? I call that sketchy. At least the accumulation of influential intertextuality is from public and published information. Sure, you consent to all the terms and policy to use the tool, but what does the regulation of this qualitative data look like? My understanding is that this future is dependent on the optimistic or pessimistic attitudes of elected state officials.

Finally, an attendee captured my attention from checking out the cute boys and girls in the crowd, by asking Bores this question. In response, Bores politely declined to answer and referred the inquirer to connect with a lawyer. Thanks for nothing, Bores. 

Then afterward, someone posing a question about a robot apocalypse gets answered? Not impressed. I believe Assembly Member Bores should have been better prepared to field AI and intellectual property questions considering he's already helped inventors protect their property.

There are a couple of ways content creators can take matters into their own hands and protect their intellectual property. One course of action Bores suggests is the classic “vote local” approach. He says citizens should participate in state elections to voice their opinion on the optimistic and pessimistic AI rules and regulations society will have to follow. 

Another way to protect yourself is by publishing content, text or visuals on the blockchain. Communities like the Violet Verse protect, support, and reward contributors and their content at VioletVerse.io by encouraging content ownership with pay walls on the FLOW blockchain.The community earns and exchanges VV tokens on the FLOW blockchain to access exclusive fashion, lifestyle, and Web3 articles. Thus, the writer’s ownership is recorded forever on the FLOW blockchain. 

The takeaway

One thing is for sure, writers and content creators should be wary of depending on the government protecting their IP. Those prioritizing ownership of their evolving content should explore other systems and strategies to protect their priceless musings (hello, NFTs?!) 

Leaving the event, I couldn’t help but wonder: Am I optimistic or pessimistic about generative AI centalization? After walking away from the DeSci NYC meetup with my unanswered question, I think I’m right on the guardrail in between. 

Watch previous DeSci NYC event streams on their website, here.

For more content questioning and exploring the corner of Web3, science, and lifestyle - visit VioletVerse.io.