Wiebke Hutiri

Wiebke Hutiri, Morgan Scheuerman, Shruti Nagpal et al.

This paper argues that a one-size-fits-all approach to specifying consent for the use of creative works in generative AI is insufficient. Real-world ownership and rights holder structures, the imitation of artistic styles and likeness, and the limitless contexts of use of AI outputs make the status quo of binary consent with opt-in by default untenable. To move beyond the current impasse, we consider levers of control in generative AI workflows at training, inference, and dissemination. Based on these insights, we position inference-time opt-in as an overlooked opportunity for nuanced consent verification. We conceptualize nuanced consent conditions for opt-in and propose an agent-based inference-time opt-in architecture to verify if user intent requests meet conditional consent granted by rights holders. In a case study for music, we demonstrate that nuanced opt-in at inference can account for established rights and re-establish a balance of power between rights holders and AI developers.

Fabio Morreale, Wiebke Hutiri, Joan Serrà et al.

The rise of AI-generated music is diluting royalty pools and revealing structural flaws in existing remuneration frameworks, challenging the well-established artist compensation systems in the music industry. Existing compensation solutions, such as piecemeal licensing agreements, lack scalability and technical rigour, while current data attribution mechanisms provide only uncertain estimates and are rarely implemented in practice. This paper introduces a framework for a generative music infrastructure centred on direct attribution, transparent royalty distribution, and granular control for artists and rights' holders. We distinguish ontologically between the training set and the inference set, which allows us to propose two complementary forms of attribution: training-time attribution and inference-time attribution. We here favour inference-time attribution, as it enables direct, verifiable compensation whenever an artist's catalogue is used to condition a generated output. Besides, users benefit from the ability to condition generations on specific songs and receive transparent information about attribution and permitted usage. Our approach offers an ethical and practical solution to the pressing need for robust compensation mechanisms in the era of AI-generated music, ensuring that provenance and fairness are embedded at the core of generative systems.

Wiebke Hutiri, Oresiti Papakyriakopoulos, Alice Xiang

The rapid and wide-scale adoption of AI to generate human speech poses a range of significant ethical and safety risks to society that need to be addressed. For example, a growing number of speech generation incidents are associated with swatting attacks in the United States, where anonymous perpetrators create synthetic voices that call police officers to close down schools and hospitals, or to violently gain access to innocent citizens' homes. Incidents like this demonstrate that multimodal generative AI risks and harms do not exist in isolation, but arise from the interactions of multiple stakeholders and technical AI systems. In this paper we analyse speech generation incidents to study how patterns of specific harms arise. We find that specific harms can be categorised according to the exposure of affected individuals, that is to say whether they are a subject of, interact with, suffer due to, or are excluded from speech generation systems. Similarly, specific harms are also a consequence of the motives of the creators and deployers of the systems. Based on these insights we propose a conceptual framework for modelling pathways to ethical and safety harms of AI, which we use to develop a taxonomy of harms of speech generators. Our relational approach captures the complexity of risks and harms in sociotechnical AI systems, and yields a taxonomy that can support appropriate policy interventions and decision making for the responsible development and release of speech generation models.