Cat is out of the bag running natively on millions of devices, no ctrl-Z here.
We’ve filed a lawsuit challenging Stable Diffusion
261–270 of 473 posts
Re: We’ve filed a lawsuit challenging Stable Diffusion
#262Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is a 1080p MP4 video of a film if not simply a highly detailed, irreversible but guaranteed unique checksum of that original content?
I think this is overstretching it. That would be a checksum that can be parsed by humans and contains artistic value that serves as the basis for claims to copyright. An actual checksum no longer has artistic value in itself and cant reproduce the original work. Which is why this is framed as compression, it implies that fundamentally SD makes copies instead of (re)creating art. Leaving out the issue of recreating fo…
Overfitting seems like a fuzzy area here. I could train a model on one image that could consistently produce an output no human could tell apart from the original. And of course, shades of gray from there.
Regarding your edit, what are the chances of a "hash collision" where the hash is two MP4 files for two different movies? Seems wildly astronomical.. impossible even? That's why this hash method is so special, plus the built in preview feature you can use to validate your hash against the source material, even without access to the original.
Re: We’ve filed a lawsuit challenging Stable Diffusion
#263“Stable Diffusion contains unauthorized copies of millions—and possibly billions—of copyrighted images.” That’s going to be hard to argue. Where are the copies? “Having copied the five billion images—without the consent of the original artists—Stable Diffusion relies on a mathematical process called diffusion to store compressed copies of these training images, which in turn are recombine…
You seem to be under the impression that SD can only generate original art. However, it will literally recreate existing paintings for you if you just prompt it with the title. Identical composition and everything.
I’m curious. Can you give an example of that happening for a painting that’s still in copyright?
Re: We’ve filed a lawsuit challenging Stable Diffusion
#264Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's going to be very hard to them to argue against Stable Diffusion and not reach the conclusion that people looking at art are doing exactly what training the AI did. You looked at my art, now I can use copyright against the copies in your brain.
By forcing the AI community to develop technology to avoid replication of training examples they might disclose every bit of human copying as well. What can detect copyright violations in AI can be applied on human works as well.
I’m afraid we won’t like the outcome.
Re: We’ve filed a lawsuit challenging Stable Diffusion
#265I keep getting reminded of the Tom Scott near-future video on how lawyers end up ruining the singularity. [1] As the line between artificial neural nets and natural neural nets continue to blur, surely the same rules should apply to both? Of course the counter-argument "some NNs are somehow different than others based on color [2]" walks you straight into an ongoing ethical minefield in the social sciences and biolog…
>>I keep getting reminded of the Tom Scott near-future video on how lawyers end up ruining the singularity
If you think that this tech is remotely close to anything resembling general intelligence or a singularity, I've got an image model to sell you.
Re: We’ve filed a lawsuit challenging Stable Diffusion
#266“Stable Diffusion contains unauthorized copies of millions—and possibly billions—of copyrighted images.” That’s going to be hard to argue. Where are the copies? “Having copied the five billion images—without the consent of the original artists—Stable Diffusion relies on a mathematical process called diffusion to store compressed copies of these training images, which in turn are recombine…
> That’s going to be hard to argue. Where are the copies?
Discovery will show exactly what the base images for training are. You can view that the outputs are derivative works.
I don't think the mechanism is going to shield the violation, and frankly it shouldn't.
License your source material for the purpose and do it right. Doesn't everyone know it's wrong to steal?
Re: We’ve filed a lawsuit challenging Stable Diffusion
#267Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not a copy, a hash or fingerprint. Just enough data to measure if it's substantially similar. But yes, it may be infeasible to index and compare against every image ever uploaded.
If I understand correctly, wouldn't a hash database of be larger than the actual model? (in fact by 1 or 2 orders of magnitude?)
Approximately, yes.
Re: We’ve filed a lawsuit challenging Stable Diffusion
#268“Stable Diffusion contains unauthorized copies of millions—and possibly billions—of copyrighted images.” That’s going to be hard to argue. Where are the copies? “Having copied the five billion images—without the consent of the original artists—Stable Diffusion relies on a mathematical process called diffusion to store compressed copies of these training images, which in turn are recombine…
> That’s going to be hard to argue. Where are the copies? Discovery will show exactly what the base images for training are. You can view that the outputs are derivative works. I don't think the mechanism is going to shield the violation, and frankly it shouldn't. License your source material for the purpose and do it right. Doesn't everyone know it's wrong to steal?
People in art school also practice by studying existing art and images.
Re: We’ve filed a lawsuit challenging Stable Diffusion
#269Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That’s going to be hard to argue. Where are the copies? Discovery will show exactly what the base images for training are. You can view that the outputs are derivative works. I don't think the mechanism is going to shield the violation, and frankly it shouldn't. License your source material for the purpose and do it right. Doesn't everyone know it's wrong to steal?
People in art school also practice by studying existing art and images.
I think what’s clear is that this is an unprecedented type of use. I’m really interested in seeing how the courts rule on this one as it has wide implications for the AI era.
Re: We’ve filed a lawsuit challenging Stable Diffusion
#270Earlier quoted context omitted.
People in art school also practice by studying existing art and images.
I think what’s clear is that this is an unprecedented type of use. I’m really interested in seeing how the courts rule on this one as it has wide implications for the AI era.
If not done extremely carefully, it also has wide implications for human artists