.jpeg)
‘This short book is more than just a critical analysis of the deep question posed in the title. It is a scientific detective story, which keeps the reader on his toes as the evidence is put in place bit by bit. John Lennox reaches his final conclusion in grand Hercule Poirot style, revealing the answer that he sees as the only possible solution to the pieces of evidence he has amassed along the way. If you begin this book thinking the answer to the question in the title is “No”, you will enjoy this masterful collecting of the evidence. If you begin it thinking it is “Yes”, maybe you won’t in the end be persuaded to change your view, but you will certainly be faced with a lot of challenging and thought-provoking ideas that will certainly tax your powers of reasoning. Whatever your final conclusion, it is impossible not to find this a stimulating read.’ --Keith Frayn, PhD ScD FRCPath, Professor of Human Metabolism, University of Oxford*
*_____Lennox, John C. God's Undertaker: Has Science Buried God? (p. 4). Lion Hudson. Kindle Edition.
It is clear as page after page begins, that Lennox has conducted a major research effort, pulling out all relevant books that have been written about this 2000+ mystery. And, as a life-long student, clearly, some of which were actually within the great halls of education around the world, he begins with a Review of Research. His method to a great extent, is to take an issue and discuss both sides... BUT, and it is a big but, in the process he also clarifies that what I, for instance, may have learned along the way, has also NOT been debunked... Darwin with his evolution concept is one such truth...
And like today, when the lies are even more used by those who choose to gain their riches and fame through lies, manipulation and even criminal acts, including violence/death, there were always those who claimed that they were right and any alternative opinions were without evidence and therefore they were right...
I smiled when Lennox pointed out that they denied that Faith was evidence... Yet, in reality, were using "Faith" in their own belief even when it had been ultimately proven inaccurate
Kinda like the republican christian nationalist "faith" that the 2020 election was not won by President Biden... This is one time when an analogy between history and the present proves to be spot-on in Truth... even while those who deny it or claim that the election was rigged, broken, or whatever...is still spouted by those who were elected to respond to the need of our citizens. All of Them...
Addressing the question whether science should do away with religion, Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg said: ‘The world needs to wake up from the long nightmare of religion... Anything we scientists can do to weaken the hold of religion should be done, and may in fact be our greatest contribution to civilization.’ Unsurprisingly, Richard Dawkins went even further. ‘I am utterly fed up with the respect we have been brainwashed into bestowing upon religion.’ And yet, and yet... Is this really true? Are all religious people to be written off as prejudiced and underinformed? After all, some of them are scientists who have won the Nobel Prize. Are they really pinning their hopes on finding a dark corner of the universe that science can never hope to illuminate? Certainly that is scarcely a fair or true description of most of the early pioneers in science who, like Kepler, claimed that it was precisely their conviction that there was a Creator that inspired their science to ever greater heights. For them it was the dark corners of the universe that science did illuminate that provided ample evidence of the ingenuity of God.*
*_____Lennox, John C. God's Undertaker: Has Science Buried God? (pp. 8-9). Lion Hudson. Kindle Edition.
I think I'm going to stop for today... I am still not comfortable with how to share...with new copyright concerns... Here's what I found on a search, which happened to be from LinkedIn, so I've followed the creator and will see if I can get more specific info as it pertains to writers and book reviewers... Note that AI is now part of searching... but did not include the creator, merely the link. To me that is not AI, it is merely, perhaps upgraded, but still a search we've been doing since the Internet was created... And with this administration, we all know anything is possible if a deal is made...and money crosses hands... Dealing with the issue of AI does not address the potential theft and reproduction of somebody's creative works!
As AI technologies continue to develop at an unprecedented pace, the tension between AI developers’ need for vast amounts of data and the creative industries’ rights over their content has become a central legal and commercial challenge.Earlier this year, the UK Government closed its consultation on AI and copyright, aiming to strike a balance between innovation and intellectual property protection. But as ever, the global picture is far from unified and the differences between jurisdictions are telling.
🔍 How are different jurisdictions responding?
🔹 UK: Proposes an opt-out model. AI developers could use copyright works unless rights holders actively reserve their rights. Transparency obligations are likely.
🔹 EU: Permits text and data mining (TDM) for both research and commercial use, under the Digital Single Market Directive. Rights holders can opt out. Transparency measures are set to tighten under the EU AI Act.
🔹 US: Relies on the broad but uncertain fair use doctrine. Each case turns on its facts — as shown by the NYT v OpenAI litigation. Legislative reform is expected, particularly under a new Trump administration.
🔹 Japan: Offers the most permissive regime. TDM and AI training are allowed even for commercial use, provided outputs comply with existing copyright law. No formal transparency rules yet, but the JCO is watching the space.
📊 TDM & Transparency: a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction snapshot:
Text & Data Mining (TDM)
🔹 UK: Currently limited to non-commercial research. Proposal on the table to allow commercial use, provided rights holders can opt out.
🔹 EU: TDM permitted for both research and commercial purposes. Rights holders may opt out.
🔹 US: Flexible, thanks to fair use doctrine, but unpredictable. No specific legislation governing TDM. Judicial decisions will shape the boundaries.
🔹 Japan: Broad scope for TDM and AI training. Legal framework already accommodates information analysis, with minimal restrictions.
Transparency Obligations
🔹 UK: Consultation suggests requiring AI developers to disclose summaries training datasets. Aims to build trust and support enforcement.
🔹 EU: The EU AI Act introduces mandatory summaries of training datasets - they must be “sufficiently detailed”.
🔹 US: California’s new Assembly Bill 2013 mandates high-level disclosure of training data. Due to take effect in January 2026, so it is subject to change under the new administration.
🔹 Japan: No clear planned legislation on disclosure. However, the JCO has raised the possibility of future guidance or regulation on transparency and dataset disclosure.
💡 Our Perspective: In our full article, we unpack the legal issues in detail and suggest a middle-ground approach. Without careful alignment, overly strict local rules may stifle AI innovation while failing to prevent the use of protected content abroad.
Read the full deep-dive and our proposed solution here: https://lnkd.in/ehQ846hu
AI & Copyright Law: comparing global approachesvwv.co.uk









