Re: Google opening the door to a discussion about AI opt-out

We are also participating in this work, and we have also thrown a solution
into the ring - our newly announced "Data Mining" property created in
association with the PLUS Coalition:
https://iptc.org/news/exclude-images-from-generative-ai-iptc-photo-metadata-standard-2023-1/

I think all of these solutions have their place - robots.txt, TDMRep, IPTC
embedded image/video metadata using XMP and C2PA Data Mining exclusion
assertions. It makes crawling a little bit more complicated for the
scrapers, but hopefully the tools will evolve quickly to support these
mechanisms. (For the open source crawling tools, we might have to
contribute some code to help them along!)

Best regards,

Brendan Quinn
Managing Director, IPTC
www.iptc.org



On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 4:40 AM Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>
wrote:

> I also attending the webinar and am glad to see Google getting into the
> act and doing so by taking input and wanting to work through a standards
> process…All good!
>
>
>
> The current problem with the robots.txt direction is the same as the
> current TDM specification – which is that it assumes that the owner of the
> content also owns/manages/controls the web site on which it is hosted.
> That may help the professional publisher who maintains their sites, but
> it’s not helpful for the average user putting their content up on social
> media, stock image services, etc.
>
>
>
> Leonard
>
>
>
> *From: *Laurent Le Meur <laurent@edrlab.org>
> *Date: *Sunday, October 29, 2023 at 3:06 PM
> *To: *public-tdmrep@w3.org <public-tdmrep@w3.org>
> *Subject: *Google opening the door to a discussion about AI opt-out
>
> *EXTERNAL: Use caution when clicking on links or opening attachments.*
>
>
>
> On Thursday, 26/10, the Google "The AI Web Publisher Control Development
> Team" has organized a first webinar (not a discussion, a presentation)
> "about developing machine-readable means to provide web publisher choice
> and control for emerging AI and research use cases."
>
> I listened to the webinar, and I hope some of you could participate too.
>
> This is the first time an AI Actor opens the door for discussion, and this
> is a big one.
>
>
>
> The team seems open to standardizing a method with a standards body - they
> are considering working with the IETF.
>
>
>
> During the call, they developed the different issues to be solved:
> alignment of the different existing options for blocking crawlers,
> transparency of the ownership and purpose of crawlers, the granularity of
> the access control, with the notion of a taxonomy of crawl purposes (ex.
> "search engines" "generative AI applications"), and how to incentivize the
> adoption of shared standards.
>
>
>
> In summary, these notions are crossing our current interrogations and it
> is time to discuss them also in this group.
>
>
>
> The Google team seems inclined to use an evolution of robots.txt for that..
> They seem ready to add lots of semantics to its current basic model. They
> didn't speak about robots tags, which should be added to the discussion.
>
> Personally, I see no problem moving from our current implementation of
> this tdmrep.json file to the good old robots.txt IF the semantics of the
> latter evolve.
>
>
>
> The Google team is now releasing a questionnaire. I received a password
> for accessing it. Please consider joining this effort, from this blog post
>
>
>
>
>
> A principled approach to evolving choice and control for web content
> <https://blog.google/technology/ai/ai-web-publisher-controls-sign-up/>
>
> blog.google
> <https://blog.google/technology/ai/ai-web-publisher-controls-sign-up/>
>
>
>
> and form
>
> AI Web Publisher Controls Mailing List Sign-Up
> <https://services.google.com/fb/forms/ai-web-publisher-controls-external/>
>
> services.google.com
> <https://services.google.com/fb/forms/ai-web-publisher-controls-external/>
>
> [image: favicon.ico]
> <https://services.google.com/fb/forms/ai-web-publisher-controls-external/>
>
>
>