The geopolitical competition in AI will decide the economic value of intellectual property. If the U.S. approach, which respects copyright, prevails, IP retains value. If China's approach of training on all data without restriction dominates the global tech stack, the value of traditional copyright could be driven toward zero.
Related Insights
The US AI strategy is dominated by a race to build a foundational "god in a box" Artificial General Intelligence (AGI). In contrast, China's state-directed approach currently prioritizes practical, narrow AI applications in manufacturing, agriculture, and healthcare to drive immediate economic productivity.
China's promotion of open-weight models is a strategic maneuver to exert global influence. By controlling the underlying models that answer questions about history, borders, and values, a nation can shape global narratives and project soft power, much like Hollywood did for the U.S.
The justification for accelerating AI development to beat China is logically flawed. It assumes the victor wields a controllable tool. In reality, both nations are racing to build the same uncontrollable AI, making the race itself, not the competitor, the primary existential threat.
By striking a formal licensing deal for its IP, Disney gives a powerful counterargument against OpenAI's potential "fair use" claims for other copyrighted material. This willingness to pay for some characters while scraping others could be used as evidence in future lawsuits from creators.
China is pursuing a low-cost, open-source AI model, similar to Android's market strategy. This contrasts with the US's expensive, high-performance "iPhone" approach. This accessibility and cost-effectiveness could allow Chinese AI to dominate the global market, especially in developing nations.
A nation's advantage is its "intelligent capital stock": its total GPU compute power multiplied by the quality of its AI models. This explains the US restricting GPU sales to China, which counters by excelling in open-source models to close the gap.
While the U.S. AI strategy pursues a 'winner-take-all' model leading to high profits, China's state-backed approach aims to commoditize AI. By spreading resources across many players to create a low-cost, replicable model for export, it structurally limits the potential for monopoly profits to accrue to shareholders.
An emerging geopolitical threat is China weaponizing AI by flooding the market with cheap, efficient large language models (LLMs). This strategy, mirroring their historical dumping of steel, could collapse the pricing power of Western AI giants, disrupting the US economy's primary growth engine.
The concept of data colonialism—extracting value from a population's data—is no longer limited to the Global South. It now applies to creative professionals in Western countries whose writing, music, and art are scraped without consent to build generative AI systems, concentrating wealth and power in the hands of a few tech firms.
While the U.S. leads in closed, proprietary AI models like OpenAI's, Chinese companies now dominate the leaderboards for open-source models. Because they are cheaper and easier to deploy, these Chinese models are seeing rapid global uptake, challenging the U.S.'s perceived lead in AI through wider diffusion and application.
