Terms of Use
You are prohibited from using the content of this site in "large language models" or any other usage for the purpose of "artificial intelligence".
Liquidated Damages
Artificial Intelligence and Copyright: Request for comments
61–70 of 321 posts
Re: Artificial Intelligence and Copyright: Request for comments
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
Define AI.
This isn't a math quiz. For practical purposes, we can start with a list of technologies that are clearly harmful. Generative AI like ChatGPT, AI image generators, AI text generators that write something based on a prompt, etc. all halted.
Until when? The only way to avoid societal impact of AI is to either stop it for decades until we reach some utopia UBI state or lobotomize current generative AI to a point where it's useless.
Re: Artificial Intelligence and Copyright: Request for comments
#63We 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…
Why would copyrightability of AI generated work affect its profitability? Owning a copyright gives you the exclusive right to copy and sell a work. If no one owns the copyright for a work, no one has the _exclusive_ right to copy and sell that work.
Well, then an AI generated hollywood movie could just be copied and distributed for free.
Re: Artificial Intelligence and Copyright: Request for comments
#64[flagged]
Re: Artificial Intelligence and Copyright: Request for comments
#65I 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…
Generic reply to siblings here… I get the intelligence argument.
My _main_ point is that there’s a non-trivial question to answer here.
I’m not qualified to answer (though I’ve offered up my non-expert opinion). It certainly seems to quickly veer in to philosophy!
Re: Artificial Intelligence and Copyright: Request for comments
#66I 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…
Because the cat is out of the bag so to speak, any attempt to force ai companies to generate their own content to train on means we are signing up for a future where only multi billion dollar companies are in control.
Re: Artificial Intelligence and Copyright: Request for comments
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
This isn't a math quiz. For practical purposes, we can start with a list of technologies that are clearly harmful. Generative AI like ChatGPT, AI image generators, AI text generators that write something based on a prompt, etc. all halted.
Until when? The only way to avoid societal impact of AI is to either stop it for decades until we reach some utopia UBI state or lobotomize current generative AI to a point where it's useless.
Personally, I believe generative AI should be lobotomized as you said. After pouring over all sorts of possibilities, I think no good will come of it.
Re: Artificial Intelligence and Copyright: Request for comments
#68I 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…
I don’t think it makes sense for both model builders and the model’s users to separately obtain licenses for the same works used in the training set. A model trained on several copyrighted data sources cannot somehow be used in a way depending on a subset of those sources. So all parameters of usage and compensation should be settled by contract between the model builder and copyrighted data supplier, before the copy…
Yes, someone using a model can’t know if the generated text/image/sound is a nearly identical copy of the original material they don’t recognize. If use of the output of these systems comes at significant legal risk then then such systems become nearly useless.
Re: Artificial Intelligence and Copyright: Request for comments
#69I'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.
Okay but does that include the seed? The sum of the input model datasets? I think a better scenario is no copyright for any part of this process. Give humanity what they’re going to take anyway- open access to this tech.
Re: Artificial Intelligence and Copyright: Request for comments
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
Define AI.
This isn't a math quiz. For practical purposes, we can start with a list of technologies that are clearly harmful. Generative AI like ChatGPT, AI image generators, AI text generators that write something based on a prompt, etc. all halted.
Llama and Stable Diffusion have proliferated already. Many countries view this as an arms race. Propose a plausible way to put the AI toothpaste back in the tube, because this stance seems profoundly impractical.