Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Artificial Intelligence and Copyright: Request for comments

federalregister.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 321 posts

Re: Artificial Intelligence and Copyright: Request for comments

#11

Post by darkclouds »

I would say, treat the AI like a human viewing said data/material, but unlike the majority of humans, most dont have Kim Peek levels of observation and recall, so should there be some sort of expiration of data built into AI's and if so, should it be a blanket cut off date for all data an AI has been exposed to, or allow for some specialisation like a human might have in order to fulfil their occupation?

I'm also aware that search engines have access to data, most humans do not, which gives the search engines an advantage, think accessing ft.com for example, so should AI's have access to data in the context of a search engine or as a human?

Its tough, I want to give AI's full access to see what the tech is truly capable of, but I'm aware this will lead to more global monopolies over and above the existing search engine monopolies allowed to dominate in a country or territory, which will harm smaller AI entities.

Re: Artificial Intelligence and Copyright: Request for comments

#13

Post by LegitShady »

Der_Einzige wrote: post #5

I'm going to try to plead my case for images generated using sophisticated prompt engineering to be copyrightable. For example, at the point that I've written a prompt with 20 tags, 10 negative prompt tags, some loras, custom weights, embeddings merges, and prompt editing, I'm now writing what is effectively a "program", which should be copyrightable and so should its outputs. It's total BS to me that a book of midjo…

The thing you're authoring is just your prompt. Apply for a copyright for it. The image or text generated in reply is generated by a computer with no more input from you than someone commissioning work using very precise words, and lacks human authorship.

Re: Artificial Intelligence and Copyright: Request for comments

#14

Post by rickmode »

I believe we first need to answer the question of whether the copyright of the AI model’s source text or images affects the output.

My opinion — and note I’m a software engineer, not a lawyer — is that an AI, being a statistical model and not generally intelligent, should not be allowed to disregard the copyright of its source material. This would, I think, require the AI’s creator to secure a license for all of its sources that allows this sort of transformation and presentation. And further, a user of the AI would themselves require a license to use the output.

The alternative seems to be “anything goes”.

Re: Artificial Intelligence and Copyright: Request for comments

#15

Post by andrewprock »

Der_Einzige wrote: post #5

I'm going to try to plead my case for images generated using sophisticated prompt engineering to be copyrightable. For example, at the point that I've written a prompt with 20 tags, 10 negative prompt tags, some loras, custom weights, embeddings merges, and prompt editing, I'm now writing what is effectively a "program", which should be copyrightable and so should its outputs. It's total BS to me that a book of midjo…

Your prompt (the input) should be copyrightable. The output should not.

Re: Artificial Intelligence and Copyright: Request for comments

#16

Post by LegitShady »

stale2002 wrote: post #9
stonogo wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you're passing inputs to a program, and your description completely omits the vast majority of that input: the creative output of an unknown number of other people , whose rights you are attempting to launder.

Thats nice and all. But it has nothing to do with whether something is copyrightable or not. Instead, something is copyrightable based on the amount of human input into the process. And it is very clear that there can be a lot of human input into AI image generation. Even though I will concede that going into midjourney and just typing in "Hot anime girl" isn't a lot of input and likely doesn't deserve copyright prot…

No your human input product is the inputs you authored but you're applying for copyright for something else.

Re: Artificial Intelligence and Copyright: Request for comments

#17

Post by dleeftink »

stonogo wrote: post #7
Der_Einzige wrote: post #5

I'm going to try to plead my case for images generated using sophisticated prompt engineering to be copyrightable. For example, at the point that I've written a prompt with 20 tags, 10 negative prompt tags, some loras, custom weights, embeddings merges, and prompt editing, I'm now writing what is effectively a "program", which should be copyrightable and so should its outputs. It's total BS to me that a book of midjo…

No, you're passing inputs to a program, and your description completely omits the vast majority of that input: the creative output of an unknown number of other people , whose rights you are attempting to launder.

Sampling is an art form if properly attributed (and possibly even without; whole genres are built on the premise), especially if it elevates the original work.

That's not to say copyrighting ML derived creative works is the way forward, but that creativity has bearing wherever a 'medium' can be manipulated.

Re: Artificial Intelligence and Copyright: Request for comments

#18

Post by vouaobrasil »

We as a society have a relatively healthy setup for people to create art and content. Sure there are problems, but on the whole it mostly works. What AI will do is destroy that by removing the profitability of creating that content.

Although generative AI operates on a similar principle to a human being exposed to a large number of artworks, it does so at a speed blindingly faster, enabling it to outcompete humans at many tasks. The number of such tasks will only increase in the future.

Thus, small-time content creators who make an independent living from content creation will be squeezed out and left in the dark. In some years, it will be very hard to make money from content creation at all.

The access to information and entertainment will also become more anonymous, will most people consuming things through AI generation. Of course, that will be convenient at first, but we will end up with a world where a significantly SMALLER fraction of people controlling AI supply us with everything. (Including manipulative advertising to consume more of their product.)

For every benefit that AI gives us, there are 10 losses.

I used to dislike draconian copyright laws, but now I like them. And I sincerely hope they are used against AI to make AI unprofitable. I believe further that AI will be society-disrupting in a variety of other ways and thus, as a society, we should destroy it. But I am pessimistic.

Re: Artificial Intelligence and Copyright: Request for comments

#19

Post by Andrex »

yieldcrv wrote: post #2

I’ve made so much money stacking my pitch decks and websites with AI generated media that I don't care if someone copy and pastes it and uses it commercially too People married to their prompt engineering outputs are really missing the forest for the trees

An entire forest of hallucinated trees, sounds tranquil yet disturbing.

Re: Artificial Intelligence and Copyright: Request for comments

#20

Post by cscurmudgeon »

nvy wrote: post #6
yieldcrv wrote: post #2

I’ve made so much money stacking my pitch decks and websites with AI generated media that I don't care if someone copy and pastes it and uses it commercially too People married to their prompt engineering outputs are really missing the forest for the trees

Perhaps it's the artists on whose content your models got trained that are rightfully upset. After all, you're not giving them a dime and neither is "open" "AI"

Do the artists pay other artists they "trained" on consciously and subconsciously?
Post reply on HN