Yes, But Not Always. Generative AI Needs Nuanced Opt-in

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.09413v1
• Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2026 15:26:57 GMT
• Title: Yes, But Not Always. Generative AI Needs Nuanced Opt-in
• Abstract summary: We argue that a one-size-fits-all approach to specifying consent for the use of creative works in generative AI is insufficient.<n>We propose an agent-based inference-time opt-in architecture to verify if user intent requests meet conditional consent granted by rights holders.
• Score: 7.592145566784743
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: 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.

Related papers

• Trustworthy AI Suffers from Invariance Conflicts and Causality is The Solution [80.98492754957466]
  Core trustworthy AI objectives, such as fairness, robustness, privacy, and explainability, are hard to achieve simultaneously.<n>This paper argues that causality is necessary to understand and balance trade-offs in performance and multiple objectives of trustworthy AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-04T14:26:28Z)
• Authorize-on-Demand: Dynamic Authorization with Legality-Aware Intellectual Property Protection for VLMs [70.09137776277994]
  AoD-IP is a framework that supports authorize-on-demand and legality-aware assessment.<n>AoD-IP maintains strong authorized-domain performance and reliable unauthorized detection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-05T07:36:07Z)
• Upholding Epistemic Agency: A Brouwerian Assertibility Constraint for Responsible AI [0.0]
  I propose a Brouwer-inspired assertibility constraint for responsible AI.<n>In high-stakes domains, systems may assert or deny claims only if they can provide a publicly inspectable and contestable certificate of entitlement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-04T12:14:21Z)
• Creativity in the Age of AI: Rethinking the Role of Intentional Agency [0.35854592084750364]
  We argue that the Intentional Agency Condition (IAC) should be rejected as a general condition of creativity.<n>We show that recent advances in generative AI have rendered the IAC increasingly problematic, both descriptively and functionally.<n>We propose replacing the IAC with a consistency requirement, according to which creativity tracks the reliable generation of novel and valuable products.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-22T09:31:12Z)
• A Pragmatic View of AI Personhood [45.069027101429704]
  Agentic Artificial Intelligence is set to trigger a "Cambrian explosion" of new kinds of personhood.<n>This paper proposes a pragmatic framework for navigating this diversification.<n>We argue that this traditional bundle can be unbundled, creating bespoke solutions for different contexts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-30T11:36:34Z)
• Countering Privacy Nihilism [2.6212127510234797]
  AI may be presumed capable of inferring "everything from everything"<n>Discarding data categories as a normative anchoring in privacy and data protection is what we call privacy nihilism.<n>We propose moving away from privacy frameworks that focus solely on data type, neglecting all other factors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-24T09:52:18Z)
• Can AI be Consentful? [0.5278958184444331]
  generative AI systems expose the challenges of traditional legal and ethical frameworks built around consent.<n>This chapter examines how the conventional notion of consent, while fundamental to data protection and privacy rights, proves insufficient in addressing the implications of AI-generated content derived from personal data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-27T15:32:16Z)
• Resource Rational Contractualism Should Guide AI Alignment [69.07915246220985]
  Contractualist alignment proposes grounding decisions in agreements that diverse stakeholders would endorse.<n>We propose Resource-Rationalism: a framework where AI systems approximate the agreements rational parties would form.<n>An RRC-aligned agent would not only operate efficiently, but also be equipped to dynamically adapt to and interpret the ever-changing human social world.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-20T18:57:13Z)
• Incorporating Legal Structure in Retrieval-Augmented Generation: A Case Study on Copyright Fair Use [44.99833362998488]
  This paper presents a domain-specific implementation of Retrieval-Augmented Generation tailored to the Fair Use Doctrine in U.S. copyright law.<n>Motivated by the increasing prevalence of DMCA takedowns and the lack of accessible legal support for content creators, we propose a structured approach that combines semantic search with legal knowledge graphs and court citation networks to improve retrieval quality and reasoning reliability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-04T15:53:49Z)
• Don't Kill the Baby: The Case for AI in Arbitration [0.0]
  Article argues that the FAA allows parties to contractually choose AI-driven arbitration, despite traditional reservations.<n>By advocating for the use of AI in arbitration, it underscores the importance of respecting contractual autonomy.<n>Ultimately, it calls for a balanced, open-minded approach to AI in arbitration, recognizing its potential to enhance the efficiency, fairness, and flexibility of dispute resolution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-21T13:34:20Z)
• Particip-AI: A Democratic Surveying Framework for Anticipating Future AI Use Cases, Harms and Benefits [54.648819983899614]
  General purpose AI seems to have lowered the barriers for the public to use AI and harness its power. We introduce PARTICIP-AI, a framework for laypeople to speculate and assess AI use cases and their impacts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-21T19:12:37Z)
• How VADER is your AI? Towards a definition of artificial intelligence systems appropriate for regulation [39.58317527488534]
  Recent AI regulation proposals adopt AI definitions affecting ICT techniques, approaches, and systems that are not AI.<n>We propose a framework to score how validated as appropriately-defined for regulation (VADER) an AI definition is.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-07T17:41:15Z)
• Trustworthy AI: Deciding What to Decide [41.10597843436572]
  We propose a novel framework of Trustworthy AI (TAI) encompassing crucial components of AI. We aim to use this framework to conduct the TAI experiments by quantitive and qualitative research methods. We formulate an optimal prediction model for applying the strategic investment decision of credit default swaps (CDS) in the technology sector.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-21T13:43:58Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.