arXiv:2507.01051cs.CYcs.AI2025-07被引 1

AI训练数据的二次生成内容,个人无法真正同意。

Can AI be Consentful?

  • 分析了传统同意机制在AI生成内容中的三大失效问题。
  • 指出用户无法对数据衍生出的海量输出进行有效授权。
  • 适合关注AI伦理与法律合规的研究者和从业者。

生成式AI的发展暴露了传统法律与伦理框架在同意机制上的局限。尽管个人可同意其数据用于AI训练,却无法对数据可能生成的无数输出及其使用、传播范围作出有意义的同意。本文通过法律与伦理分析,识别出三个核心挑战:范围问题、时间性问题与自主性陷阱,共同构成所谓的“同意鸿沟”。当前法律框架未能充分应对这些新挑战,尤其在个体自主权、身份权利与社会责任方面存在缺失,特别是在AI生成内容创造出超出原始同意范围的新型个人表征时。通过探讨这些限制如何与负责任AI的基本原则(公平、透明、问责、自主)相交,本文强调必须演化伦理与法律层面的同意机制。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

The evolution of generative AI systems exposes the challenges of traditional legal and ethical frameworks built around consent. 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. Through legal and ethical analysis, we show that while individuals can consent to the initial use of their data for AI training, they cannot meaningfully consent to the numerous potential outputs their data might enable or the extent to which the output is used or distributed. We identify three fundamental challenges: the scope problem, the temporality problem, and the autonomy trap, which collectively create what we term a ''consent gap'' in AI systems and their surrounding ecosystem. We argue that current legal frameworks inadequately address these emerging challenges, particularly regarding individual autonomy, identity rights, and social responsibility, especially in cases where AI-generated content creates new forms of personal representation beyond the scope of the original consent. By examining how these consent limitations intersect with broader principles of responsible AI (including fairness, transparency, accountability, and autonomy) we demonstrate the need to evolve ethical and legal approaches to consent.

AI伦理数据隐私法律框架

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。