121–130 of 180 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What song did Eminem write that he would be owed loyalties for?
His entire discography, the thing that ChatGPT's impersonation of him is based on.
Oh -- so when David Guetta does it on stage it's interesting now? :P https://reticulated.net/dailyai/gpt3-uberduck-linux-gangster...
UberDuck's community specifically seems geared towards kids making memes -- I suspect they just ended up there and didn't design it that way, but wading through the terrible user created models to find ones that work was tiresome.
I tried to get https://coqui.ai/ setup to do similar things, but have not been successful.
Surely this will all explode in the next 18 mo max
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I think the case you're presenting is very likely, I don't think Sony v Universal applies too significantly. The VCR was demonstrably not in any way based on Universal's IP - it was only a tool that could be used to create copies of Universal's IP. In their capacity as tools, LLMs probably would fall under a similar model. However, the LLM itself is substantially based on the IP of all of the creators of the da…
Sony v Universal established a very important legal doctrine with regards to "commercially significant non-infringing use". You can take my word for it, you can go an do your own research, you can confirm with an IP lawyer, or you can wait for the the court's opinion. Or I guess you can give me a little bit of time to go and help you do some of your own research, which I will do right now, so just hold on a bit! I'm…
Where we differ is in how certain we are that the IF is true. I for one believe there is a good chance that the training of an LLM on copyrighted works does infringe on the copyright of those works (if no other exceptions apply, such as the LLM being trained only for academic research purposes, of course).
My original response:
Where Sony v Universal definitely applies though is when evaluating whether OpenAI's selling of GPT3 to others who then use it to create copyright-infringing works would make OpenAI liable for contributory infringement. Here, the similarities are crystal clear, and the conclusion is simple: since there clearly exist non-infringing uses of GPT3 (such as Supabase Clippy), OpenAI is fully in the clear to sell GPT3, just as much as Sony was for selling the VCR.
However, this assumes that OpenAI has the rights to the IP of GPT3 itself in the first place, which is a prerequisite to them being allowed to sell it at all. Sony certainly had the rights to the IP of the VCR - Universal never claimed that the VCR was a derivative work of their movies.
Essentially, in Sony v Universal, Universal was claiming (1) that Sony was liable for contributory infringement, since (2) all customers of Sony who used it to record and then playback a Universal show were guilty of copyright infringement. The court established that (2) was in fact fair use, and from there automatically (1) become false, since now there was an established legal way of using the Sony product.
But, in a hypothetical OpenAI v Universal, Universal could plausibly claim that (1) OpenAI is liable for copyright infringement directly, since they are distributing GPT3 , (2) which is a derived work of Universal's IP used in the training set of GPT3.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In a way, it's similar to the actors selling their digital images in the movie The Congress. It's inevitable.
wow, not many people have seen this movie. 100%.
A YouTuber called "30 Hertz" has been making several fake Eminem songs (+other artists) for 2 years now, in very good quality. An example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMunOszEQHE
Gotta admit it, I am guilty too, never heard of uberduck before and caught myself creating an account and browsing their pricing site today.
*david guetta's ghost producer
What claim do you have to say that? Here is a 30-minute lecture from the guy recording himself producing a track: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfEhLdITOac
Joachim Garraud, among others, has been producing David Guetta's tracks for 20 years.
The video reference the common ChatGPT "in the style of" prompt. Is there a list of what "styles" ChatGPT's model has been trained on ? Or is this information not disclosed since it would be an admission that ChatGPT has been trained on copyrighted lyrics, etc. by which is produces these derivative results ?
If it never heard the name Eminem or read any of the lyrics it couldn't predict anything similar.