TRV-2026-2413Published recordPeer-reviewed

Legal Ethics of Generative Artificial Intelligence Training Data Usage in Large Language Models: Copyright and Personal Data Perspective

This research originates from security and privacy risks associated with Generative AI Large Language Models (LLMs), especially concerning data used for training in relation to Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) and Personal Data Protection (PDP). The study seeks to examine existing regulatory guidance and develop a national framework that protects user privacy and IPR. The method employs normative legal research using statutory and conceptual approaches, by reviewing the legal frameworks of Indonesia, South Kor…

Policy · Problem Space (a documented problem) · first published 2026-11-07 · v1 · read the full story · raw data (JSON)

The problem

A legal analysis of Indonesian, South Korean, EU and Japanese rules found that large language models keep absorbing users' prompts, data and corrections for training, which exposes security weaknesses under personal data protection laws and risks harming original creators.

What this doesn’t fix

The conclusions come from normative legal analysis of four jurisdictions plus direct prompt testing, and the proposed framework and shared responsibility model are recommendations that have not been tested in practice.

Sources

Your take

What do you make of this one?

Cite this record

Truvace Impact Record TRV-2026-2413, v1: “Legal Ethics of Generative Artificial Intelligence Training Data Usage in Large Language Models: Copyright and Personal Data Perspective.” Truvace, 2026-11-07. /record/TRV-2026-2413 (accessed on the day you copy it). sha256 92fec6605aa0823e…

Change history

Every change made to this record since it was first published, and why. Nothing has changed since it went up.

  1. Publishedv192fec6605aa0…

    Certified into the record

Check this record hasn’t been altered
How to check it yourself, without trusting this page

Download any version from /api/record/TRV-2026-2413 and hash its canonical field yourself, for example with shasum -a 256. You should get its content_hash. Each version’s text also ends with prev:and the hash of the version before it (version 1 points to 64 zeros). If anyone had changed a single character of any version after it was saved, those hashes wouldn’t line up.